ACMDX vs. PDX
ACMDX (Absolute Capital Defender Fund) and PDX (PIMCO Dynamic Income Strategy Fund) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Over the past 5 years, ACMDX returned 4.15%/yr vs 24.61%/yr for PDX. Their 0.42 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ACMDX charges 2.70%/yr vs 2.31%/yr for PDX.
Performance
ACMDX vs. PDX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACMDX achieves a 8.42% return, which is significantly lower than PDX's 19.51% return.
ACMDX
- 1D
- 0.94%
- 1M
- 1.89%
- 6M
- 6.18%
- YTD
- 8.42%
- 1Y
- 13.13%
- 3Y*
- 9.84%
- 5Y*
- 4.15%
- 10Y*
- 4.46%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.27%
PDX
- 1D
- -0.69%
- 1M
- 2.73%
- 6M
- 10.30%
- YTD
- 19.51%
- 1Y
- 9.04%
- 3Y*
- 23.07%
- 5Y*
- 24.61%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.12%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $2.03M | $1.93M | $1.80M |
ACMDX vs. PDX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACMDX Absolute Capital Defender Fund | 8.42% | 8.56% | 9.61% | 8.51% | -15.26% | 12.00% | 5.14% | 5.64% |
PDX PIMCO Dynamic Income Strategy Fund | 19.51% | -10.59% | 36.99% | 44.51% | 23.02% | 68.79% | -44.20% | -9.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACMDX and PDX is 0.13, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.32 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2019 | 0.42 |
Over the past year, the correlation between ACMDX and PDX has dropped to 0.13 - well below their long-term average of 0.42, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
ACMDX vs. PDX — Risk / Return Rank
ACMDX
PDX
ACMDX vs. PDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) and PIMCO Dynamic Income Strategy Fund (PDX). 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.
| ACMDX | PDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.12 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.78 | 0.58 | +2.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.13 | 1.31 | +9.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACMDX vs. PDX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACMDX drawdown since its inception was -17.63%, smaller than the maximum PDX drawdown of -80.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACMDX and PDX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACMDX | PDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.63% | -80.63% | +63.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.63% | -15.65% | +11.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.50% | -37.24% | +25.74% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.63% | -37.24% | +19.61% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.63% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -13.20% | +13.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.10% | -18.74% | +13.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.15% | 6.90% | -5.75% |
Volatility
ACMDX vs. PDX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Absolute Capital Defender Fund (ACMDX) is 2.23%, while PIMCO Dynamic Income Strategy Fund (PDX) has a volatility of 3.47%. This indicates that ACMDX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACMDX | PDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.23% | 3.47% | -1.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.30% | 9.37% | -4.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.05% | 13.88% | -6.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.61% | 25.23% | -16.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.83% | 36.09% | -27.26% |
ACMDX vs. PDX - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACMDX has a 2.70% expense ratio, which is higher than PDX's 2.31% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACMDX vs. PDX - Dividend Comparison
ACMDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%, less than PDX's 21.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACMDX Absolute Capital Defender Fund | 3.04% | 3.30% | 3.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 9.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 6.87% | 2.67% | 0.67% |
PDX PIMCO Dynamic Income Strategy Fund | 21.31% | 24.34% | 6.31% | 4.30% | 5.89% | 5.28% | 14.11% | 9.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACMDX and PDX have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PDX has higher volatility (3.47%) compared to ACMDX (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACMDX dropped -17.63% vs PDX's -80.63%.
ACMDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 0.66), 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 ACMDX and PDX
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