CANE vs. PDBA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) and PDBA (Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Agricultural Commodities funds. CANE is passively managed, while PDBA is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CANE returned -12.00%/yr vs 11.84%/yr for PDBA. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CANE charges 1.88%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for PDBA.

Performance

CANE vs. PDBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a -5.28% return, which is significantly lower than PDBA's 4.26% return.

CANE

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: -6.67%
• YTD: -5.28%
• 6M: -5.84%
• 1Y: -16.08%
• 3Y*: -12.00%
• 5Y*: 2.30%
• 10Y*: -2.91%

PDBA

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: -3.59%
• YTD: 4.26%
• 6M: 4.14%
• 1Y: 3.91%
• 3Y*: 11.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CANE vs. PDBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund	-5.28%	-14.65%	-7.79%	30.06%	7.56%
PDBA Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF	4.26%	-0.76%	34.16%	7.83%	-3.34%

Correlation

The correlation between CANE and PDBA is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 24, 2022	0.38

Return for Risk

CANE vs. PDBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANE

CANE Risk / Return Rank: 3
CANE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CANE Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CANE Martin Ratio Rank: 2

PDBA

PDBA Risk / Return Rank: 13
PDBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
PDBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
PDBA Omega Ratio Rank: 13
PDBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
PDBA Martin Ratio Rank: 13

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.

CANE vs. PDBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBA). 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.

	CANE	PDBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.79	0.37	-1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.06	0.59	-1.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.07	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.81	0.46	-1.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.28	0.98	-2.26

CANE vs. PDBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANE Sharpe Ratio is -0.79, which is lower than the PDBA Sharpe Ratio of 0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CANE and PDBA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CANE vs. PDBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, which is greater than PDBA's maximum drawdown of -12.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and PDBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CANE	PDBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-81.30%	-12.45%	-68.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.82%	-8.59%	-11.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.73%	-12.45%	-29.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-67.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-64.88%	-7.47%	-57.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.51%	-3.98%	-52.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.58%	4.02%	+8.56%

Volatility

CANE vs. PDBA - Volatility Comparison

Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBA) at 2.67%. This indicates that CANE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PDBA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CANE	PDBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	2.67%	+2.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.84%	6.70%	+9.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.44%	10.58%	+9.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.98%	13.27%	+7.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.70%	13.27%	+8.43%

CANE vs. PDBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than PDBA's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

CANE vs. PDBA - Dividend Comparison

CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PDBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.19%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PDBA Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF	3.19%	3.32%	13.01%	6.82%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CANE and PDBA in my portfolio?

CANE and PDBA have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CANE or PDBA?

CANE has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to PDBA (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs PDBA's -12.45%.

Which ETF is better, CANE or PDBA?

On 3-year performance, PDBA leads with 11.84% vs -12.00% for CANE. On fees, PDBA is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, PDBA has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CANE or PDBA?

Over the 3-year period, PDBA has performed better with a 11.84% return vs -12.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CANE or PDBA?

PDBA is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CANE or PDBA?

PDBA has the higher dividend yield at 3.19%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.

What is the main difference between CANE and PDBA?

They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.88% for CANE and 0.59% for PDBA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PDBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.37 vs -0.79), 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.