BILS vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BILS (SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - BILS is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg 3-12 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BILS returned 4.66%/yr vs 16.90%/yr for CMDT. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. BILS charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

BILS vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BILS achieves a 1.40% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 23.96% return.

BILS

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 1.40%
• 6M: 1.73%
• 1Y: 3.90%
• 3Y*: 4.66%
• 5Y*: 3.29%
• 10Y*: —

CMDT

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -0.63%
• YTD: 23.96%
• 6M: 24.09%
• 1Y: 35.85%
• 3Y*: 16.90%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BILS vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BILS SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF	1.40%	4.23%	5.17%	3.35%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	23.96%	12.78%	6.93%	5.50%

Correlation

The correlation between BILS and CMDT is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	-0.08

Return for Risk

BILS vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BILS

BILS Risk / Return Rank: 100
BILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
BILS Omega Ratio Rank: 100
BILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BILS Martin Ratio Rank: 100

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 88
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BILS vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.

	BILS	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	16.80	2.92	+13.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	100.82	3.92	+96.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	42.08	1.50	+40.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	129.91	8.03	+121.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1,442.41	22.12	+1,420.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BILS vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BILS Sharpe Ratio is 16.80, which is higher than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BILS and CMDT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BILS	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.80	2.92	+13.88
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	10.79	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	9.79	1.32	+8.47

Drawdowns

BILS vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BILS drawdown since its inception was -0.41%, smaller than the maximum CMDT drawdown of -9.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BILS and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BILS	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.41%	-9.69%	+9.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.03%	-4.49%	+4.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.04%	-9.69%	+9.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-2.86%	+2.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.04%	-2.69%	+2.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	1.63%	-1.63%

Volatility

BILS vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS) is 0.06%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that BILS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BILS	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.06%	4.33%	-4.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.14%	10.30%	-10.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23%	12.35%	-12.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.31%	12.21%	-11.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.30%	12.21%	-11.91%

BILS vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BILS has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

BILS vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

BILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.81%, more than CMDT's 2.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BILS SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF	3.81%	4.08%	5.01%	4.98%	1.61%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.44%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BILS and CMDT in my portfolio?

BILS and CMDT have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BILS or CMDT?

CMDT has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to BILS (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BILS dropped -0.41% vs CMDT's -9.69%.

Which ETF is better, BILS or CMDT?

On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 16.90% vs 4.66% for BILS. On fees, BILS is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BILS or CMDT?

Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 16.90% return vs 4.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BILS or CMDT?

BILS is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BILS or CMDT?

BILS has the higher dividend yield at 3.81%, compared with 2.44% for CMDT.

What is the main difference between BILS and CMDT?

BILS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while CMDT is Commodities. BILS tracks Bloomberg 3-12 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for BILS and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.80 vs 2.92), 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.