BITQ
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
BITQ vs BLOK: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- BITQInvestors who want straightforward crypto exposure for the long run.
- BLOKInvestors who want higher current income (0.99% paid over the past 12 months while BITQ makes no distribution).
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
BLOK
Caution
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  BITQ |  BLOK |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF | Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF |
| Issuer | Bitwise Investments | Amplify ETFs |
| Last Close | $18.30 as of November 6, 2026 | $49.22 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | 0.16% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | — | 0.99% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | 41 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | — | 0.07% |
| Expense ratio | 0.85% | 0.70% |
| AUM | $356M | $888M |
| Distribution frequency | None | Annual |
| Underlying index | — | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) |
| Objective | Invests in companies participating in the crypto ecosystem. | Actively managed fund investing at least 80% of assets in equities of companies actively involved in the development and utilization of blockchain technologies, spanning crypto miners, exchanges, and enablers. Renamed from the Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF in October 2025. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 04/27/2021 | 01/16/2018 |
| Beta | 3.35 | 2.47 |
| Last dividend | — | $0.07985 |
| Ex-dividend date | 12/30/2024 | 06/29/2026 |
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
BITQ has lagged BLOK over the trailing twelve months, posting a -37.11% total return against -29.86%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: BLOK has compounded at -0.45% a year, against -9.83% for BITQ. BLOK has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 41.4% against 63.1% for BITQ. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | 5Y annualized | Since May 2021 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BITQ | -9.78% | -37.11% | 34.96% | -9.83% | -1.01% | 63.1% | 0.41 | 0.61 | -51.2% |
| BLOK | -16.07% | -29.86% | 32.50% | -0.45% | 3.71% | 41.4% | 0.58 | 0.84 | -35.6% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since May 2021” measures every fund from May 10, 2021 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Not a distribution payer
BITQ (Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. BITQ is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose BITQ if you want straightforward crypto exposure for the long run. Choose BLOK if you want higher current income (0.99% paid over the past 12 months while BITQ makes no distribution).
How the risk works
Read this before the income numbers below: the strategy mechanics on this page shape what those payouts can cost you.
- Crypto volatility. BITQ and BLOK sit on top of crypto-asset prices, which routinely swing far more than equities. A single drawdown can exceed a year of distributions, so income projections deserve extra skepticism here.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs13
Total AUM$6.71B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Bitwise Investments is known for pioneering cryptocurrency and digital asset ETFs, bringing exposure to bitcoin, ethereum, and other blockchain-based assets to mainstream investors. The firm's fund lineup spans digital assets—including single-asset and diversified cryptocurrency funds—alongside income-focused strategies that blend traditional dividend approaches with digital asset themes. The issuer has established a distinctive niche in the crypto ETF space while maintaining a footprint in conventional income investing, offering investors varied exposure levels to both emerging digital asset classes and yield-generating strategies.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on BITQ.
ETFs47
Total AUM$16.5B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Amplify ETFs is known for offering specialized, thematic investment solutions across diverse market segments including digital assets, commodities, and dividend strategies. The issuer's lineup spans multiple fund families covering income-focused strategies, covered call approaches, commodity exposure, and thematic sectors such as cybersecurity, blockchain, gaming, and sustainable investing. Notable for tickers like BLOK (blockchain), HACK (cybersecurity), and DIVO (dividend), Amplify combines traditional income strategies with alternative themes and emerging asset classes, appealing to investors seeking both yield and exposure to innovation-driven sectors.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on BLOK.
Quick verdict
BITQ (Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF) and BLOK (Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
BLOK has paid a 0.99% yield over the past 12 months. BITQ has not yet established a full distribution history, so a comparable yield figure is not available.
BLOK is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.70% compared to 0.85%.
BLOK is the larger fund by assets ($888M), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
3 shared positions
BITQ 11.0% of its top-10 weight
BLOK 10.4% of its top-10 weight
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, BITQ has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while BLOK would pay about $99.00 a year.
BITQ yield—
BLOK 12-month yield0.99%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, BITQ would cost approximately $850 in fees vs $700 for BLOK (simplified, not compounded). The $150.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
BITQ ER0.85%
BLOK ER0.70%
Strategy & risk
BITQ is an ETF, while BLOK is an actively managed ETF. Beta is 3.35 for BITQ and 2.47 for BLOK, making BLOK the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
BITQ beta3.35
BLOK beta2.47
Fund details
BITQ is managed by Bitwise Investments (launched 04/27/2021) with $356M in assets. BLOK is managed by Amplify ETFs (launched 01/16/2018) with $888M in assets.
BITQ AUM$356M
BLOK AUM$888M
Frequently asked questions
Which of BITQ or BLOK pays more dividend income?
BLOK currently reports a distribution yield, while BITQ has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.
What is the difference between BITQ and BLOK?
BITQ (Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF) is an ETF, while BLOK (Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF) is an actively managed ETF. They are issued by Bitwise Investments and Amplify ETFs respectively.
Can I hold both BITQ and BLOK?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 3 positions, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Which has lower fees, BITQ or BLOK?
BITQ has an expense ratio of 0.85% while BLOK charges 0.70%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in BITQ vs BLOK generate?
At the rates paid over the past 12 months, BITQ does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. $10,000 in BLOK would pay about $99.00 a year.
Which has performed better historically, BITQ or BLOK?
BITQ has lagged BLOK over the trailing twelve months, posting a -37.11% total return against -29.86%. The lead holds up over 5 years too: BLOK has compounded at -0.45% a year, against -9.83% for BITQ. BLOK has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 41.4% against 63.1% for BITQ. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare BITQ with
People also compare BLOK with
Popular comparisons
BITQ vs BLOK — at a glance
Generated November 1, 2026.
Figures quoted in this analysis are from its generation date and may lag the live snapshot table above, which always shows the latest data.
Overview
BITQ and BLOK are both equity ETFs targeting the cryptocurrency and blockchain sectors, but they take different structural approaches. BITQ is a passive fund investing across companies in the crypto ecosystem broadly, while BLOK is actively managed and concentrates on blockchain technology development, mining, and exchange operations. The key distinction lies in management style and sector focus: BITQ casts a wider net across crypto-adjacent businesses, whereas BLOK applies active stock selection within a narrower blockchain-specific mandate.
How they differ
BLOK's active management and tighter blockchain focus separate it most visibly from BITQ's passive approach. BLOK explicitly requires at least 80% allocation to companies developing or using blockchain technologies—miners, exchanges, infrastructure—while BITQ describes a broader crypto ecosystem without that structural constraint. BLOK charges 0.70%, which is 0.15% lower than BITQ's 0.85%, a meaningful gap for funds in the same volatile category. On risk metrics, BLOK's beta of 2.47 trails BITQ's 3.35, suggesting BITQ moves more sharply with market swings. BLOK holds significantly more assets, with $888M compared to BITQ's $356M.
Who each is best for
- BITQ: Fits investors seeking broad exposure to companies benefiting from or participating in the crypto industry without the constraint of a formal blockchain-technology mandate—those comfortable with higher volatility and willing to accept zero current yield for growth potential.
- BLOK: Designed for investors who want active oversight of blockchain-concentrated holdings and prefer a modest annual payout while accepting management fees in exchange for what the fund's strategy intends as disciplined stock selection within the crypto infrastructure space.
Key risks to know
- Sector concentration and crypto volatility. Both funds concentrate in highly cyclical crypto and blockchain equities, which can experience sharp drawdowns during regulatory uncertainty or market sentiment shifts. BITQ's higher beta of 3.35 amplifies this risk compared to BLOK's 2.47.
- Active management underperformance. BLOK's active approach carries the risk that its stock-selection process does not outperform a simpler passive alternative enough to justify the 0.70% fee, leaving investors paying for management that may trail or match passive peers after costs.
- Nascent ecosystem risk. Blockchain and crypto companies remain relatively young in public markets. Business models, competitive moats, and regulatory treatment are still solidifying, creating higher odds of significant valuation shifts or company-specific failures than in mature sectors.
Bottom line
If you want a lower fee and are willing to accept higher volatility in exchange for passive exposure across the crypto ecosystem, BITQ's simpler structure and expense ratio appeal. If you prefer active management, a narrower blockchain-development focus, and a small annual payout, BLOK's strategy and lower beta may align better—though whether active selection justifies the fee over a passive alternative remains an open question. Past performance in crypto is not predictive; both funds' valuations can move sharply.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.