BCI vs VTI
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. BCI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BCI | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.26% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $3.0B | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 14.52% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 50 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +24.59% | +14.96% | |
| 1Y Return | +38.34% | +22.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.15% | +21.51% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.64% | +12.36% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.3% | 15.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -32.7% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Aberdeen | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 30, 2017 | May 24, 2001 |
BCI vs VTI Performance
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) is a ETF from Aberdeen and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BCI returned +38.34% while VTI returned +22.39%. Year to date, BCI is up 24.59% versus a gain of 14.96% for VTI.
Over three years, BCI compounded at +13.15% per year against +21.51% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.64% and +12.36% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.16% annualized vs +7.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.4% compared with 14.3% for BCI. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -32.7% for BCI and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.35. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCI charges 0.26% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $26 vs $3 annually, a gap of $23 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCI currently yields 14.52% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BCI and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2785 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BCI or VTI?
BCI has an expense ratio of 0.26% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $23 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BCI or VTI?
Over the past year BCI returned +38.34% vs +22.39% for VTI, so BCI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), BCI annualized +7.14% vs +8.16% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BCI or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.4% annualized versus 14.3% for BCI. Worst drawdown: BCI -32.7% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BCI and VTI?
BCI and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.35, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BCI and VTI?
BCI and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2785 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCI or VTI?
BCI yields 14.52% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BCI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.