AAPW vs. PDBC
AAPW (AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF) and PDBC (Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAPW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while PDBC is a Commodities fund actively managed by Invesco. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AAPW returned 54.84% vs 36.16% for PDBC. Their -0.07 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. AAPW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PDBC.
Performance
AAPW vs. PDBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAPW achieves a 11.02% return, which is significantly lower than PDBC's 30.19% return.
AAPW
- 1D
- -2.28%
- 1M
- -2.47%
- 6M
- 12.40%
- YTD
- 11.02%
- 1Y
- 54.84%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.83%
PDBC
- 1D
- -1.77%
- 1M
- 8.70%
- 6M
- 23.48%
- YTD
- 30.19%
- 1Y
- 36.16%
- 3Y*
- 9.99%
- 5Y*
- 11.53%
- 10Y*
- 8.78%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $952.50K | $777.94K | $708.97K | |
| $116.66M | $151.96M | $123.92M |
AAPW vs. PDBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 11.02% | 8.71% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 30.19% | -0.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAPW and PDBC is -0.21, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025 | -0.07 |
The correlation between AAPW and PDBC shifts across timeframes, from -0.21 (1 year) to -0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AAPW vs. PDBC — Risk / Return Rank
AAPW
PDBC
AAPW vs. PDBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) and Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| AAPW | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.31 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.17 | 2.20 | +0.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.52 | 7.30 | +0.22 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AAPW vs. PDBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAPW drawdown since its inception was -36.28%, smaller than the maximum PDBC drawdown of -49.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAPW and PDBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAPW | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.28% | -49.52% | +13.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.36% | -16.55% | -0.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.04% | -8.78% | -4.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.45% | -23.03% | +12.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.32% | 4.97% | +2.35% |
Volatility
AAPW vs. PDBC - Volatility Comparison
AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF (AAPW) has a higher volatility of 13.12% compared to Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC) at 7.36%. This indicates that AAPW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PDBC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAPW | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.12% | 7.36% | +5.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.92% | 17.16% | +7.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.52% | 19.65% | +11.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.69% | 19.28% | +16.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.69% | 17.84% | +17.85% |
AAPW vs. PDBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAPW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than PDBC's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAPW vs. PDBC - Dividend Comparison
AAPW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 31.96%, more than PDBC's 2.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAPW AAPL WeeklyPay™ ETF | 31.96% | 28.83% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 2.95% | 3.84% | 4.42% | 4.21% | 13.05% | 50.83% | 0.01% | 1.40% | 1.00% | 3.83% | 6.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAPW and PDBC have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AAPW has higher volatility (13.12%) compared to PDBC (7.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAPW dropped -36.28% vs PDBC's -49.52%.
On 1-year performance, AAPW leads with 54.84% vs 36.16% for PDBC. On fees, PDBC is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, PDBC has been the lower-risk option at 7.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AAPW has performed better with a 54.84% return vs 36.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PDBC is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AAPW.
AAPW has the higher dividend yield at 31.96%, compared with 2.95% for PDBC.
AAPW is categorized as Derivative Income, while PDBC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AAPW and 0.58% for PDBC.
PDBC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.75), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for AAPW and PDBC
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer