ETHE vs GBTC ETF Comparison
Compare ETHE and GBTC across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between ETHE and GBTC?
ETHE is Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF, while GBTC is Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF. ETHE is tied to Alternatives; GBTC is tied to Alternatives. GBTC has the lower expense ratio in the current fund profile. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has GBTC ahead on AIQ Score, 65 versus 52.
| Metric | ETHE | GBTC | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 2.5% | 1.5% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $1.8B | $10.1B | Fund |
| Holdings | 0 | 0 | Fund |
| Average volume | 0 | 4,247,093 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | Alternatives | Alternatives | Fund |
| 1Y return | -42.5% | -28.2% | Performance |
| YTD return | -16.9% | -7.5% | Performance |
| Annualized volatility | 64.1% | 45.1% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -67.6% | -53.8% | Risk |
| Beta | 2.47 | 1.69 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.68 | -0.60 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | -1.04 | -0.96 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 52/100 | 65/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 5/10 | 9/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 79/100 | 81/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 34/100 | 39/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF vs Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF
GBTC leads
GBTC leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 2 of 4 evidence groups support GBTC, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF
Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GBTC over ETHE, 65 versus 52 as of Sep 5, 2026. GBTC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. GBTC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor GBTC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. GBTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF and Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare ETHE and GBTC against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality30%57 vs 65GBTC +8
- Risk Resilience15%34 vs 39GBTC +5
- Momentum25%79 vs 81Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor GBTC. GBTC’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -2
No new signals fired.
GBTC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ETHE and GBTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GBTC (Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
ETHE (Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 56.5% against 44.1%.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
GBTCGBTC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
GBTCGBTC on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | ETHE | GBTC | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 2.5% | 1.5% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $1.8B | $10.1B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 0 | 0 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 0 | 4,247,093 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 64.1% | 45.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -67.6% | -53.8% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.68 | -0.60 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 2.47 | 1.69 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, ETHE or GBTC?
Use holdings count, top-10 concentration and sector exposure together; the current dataset does not show a decisive holdings-count edge.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
GBTC has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
ETHE has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
GBTC has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
GBTC currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 65 to 52.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor GBTC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GBTC | 52 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 0% vs 0%; EPS growth 0% vs 0%; TTM ROE 0% vs 0%; gross margin 0% vs 0%; operating margin 0% vs 0% |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | ETHE | Price vs 50-day 24.3% vs 19.4%; vs 200-day 6.6% vs 5.3% |
| Risk Resilience | GBTC | Risk Resilience 34 vs 39 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ETHE and GBTC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on GBTC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3GBTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GBTC +13
- 52 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- GBTC +13
- 53 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- GBTC +4
- 49 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- GBTC +6
- 41 vs 47
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (17.42%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.63%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
GBTC leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.42%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.39%, AIQ -1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1ETHE closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to GBTC's edge.
- 2ETHE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3GBTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
Split| Metric | ETHE | GBTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | 0% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | 0% |
| Gross margin | 0% | 0% |
| Operating margin | 0% | 0% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0% | 0% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ETHE | GBTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.7% | 2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 31.7% | 23.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 41% | 21.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 18.8% | 13.9% |
| Year to date | -16.9% | -7.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -42.5% | -28.2% |
Technicals
ETHE has the stronger structure| Metric | ETHE | GBTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 83.6 | 83.9 |
| ADX (14) | 33.5 | 33.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 24.3% | 19.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.6% | 5.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 56.5% | 44.1% |
Risk
GBTC is the more resilient| Metric | ETHE | GBTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.47 | 1.69 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.68 | -0.6 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.04 | -0.96 |
| Max drawdown | -67.6% | -53.8% |
| Current drawdown | -47.9% | -35.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 64.1% | 45.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.8% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ETHE or GBTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GBTC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 65 against ETHE's 52. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is ETHE or GBTC the better buy right now?
GBTC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor GBTC over ETHE?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. GBTC leads Quality by 8 points; GBTC leads Risk Resilience by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, ETHE or GBTC?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, ETHE or GBTC?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, ETHE or GBTC?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, ETHE or GBTC?
GBTC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GBTC on Risk Resilience, by 5 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ETHE more profitable than GBTC?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is GBTC's lead over ETHE getting stronger or weaker?
GBTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the ETHE vs GBTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ETHE closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to GBTC's edge; ETHE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; GBTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ETHE and GBTC?
ETHE: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. GBTC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on ETHE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On GBTC it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ETHE and GBTC with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.