CCNR vs. FRDM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CCNR (ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF) and FRDM (Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CCNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by ALPS, while FRDM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. CCNR is actively managed, while FRDM is passively managed. Over the past year, CCNR returned 69.39% vs 97.46% for FRDM. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CCNR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FRDM.

Performance

CCNR vs. FRDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCNR achieves a 27.16% return, which is significantly lower than FRDM's 44.61% return.

CCNR

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 27.16%
• 6M: 30.28%
• 1Y: 69.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FRDM

• 1D: -1.30%
• 1M: 17.06%
• YTD: 44.61%
• 6M: 53.16%
• 1Y: 97.46%
• 3Y*: 37.08%
• 5Y*: 19.30%
• 10Y*: —

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

CCNR vs. FRDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	27.16%	46.48%	-8.12%
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	44.61%	61.27%	-10.72%

Correlation

The correlation between CCNR and FRDM is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2024	0.58

The correlation between CCNR and FRDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

CCNR vs. FRDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CCNR	FRDM
Energy	38.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	31.6%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	8.5%	2.2%
Utilities	8.5%	2.6%
Industrials	7.5%	8.6%
Technology	4.3%	41.1%
Consumer Cyclical	1.0%	7.8%
Financial Services	0.6%	22.1%
Real Estate	0.5%	2.5%
Communication Services	-	3.9%
Healthcare	-	1.8%

Return for Risk

CCNR vs. FRDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCNR

CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 95
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

FRDM

FRDM Risk / Return Rank: 93
FRDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FRDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
FRDM Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FRDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FRDM Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

CCNR vs. FRDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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.

	CCNR	FRDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.94	4.00	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.76	4.65	+0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.67	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.78	5.81	+4.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	35.10	23.37	+11.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CCNR vs. FRDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCNR Sharpe Ratio is 3.94, which is comparable to the FRDM Sharpe Ratio of 4.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCNR and FRDM, 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

	CCNR	FRDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.94	4.00	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.93	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.66	0.85	+0.81

Drawdowns

CCNR vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCNR drawdown since its inception was -20.06%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCNR and FRDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCNR	FRDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.06%	-40.49%	+20.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.47%	-16.87%	+10.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.87%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.14%	-1.30%	+0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.56%	-7.09%	+3.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.98%	4.18%	-2.20%

Volatility

CCNR vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) is 4.48%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 11.03%. This indicates that CCNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCNR	FRDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.48%	11.03%	-6.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.77%	21.65%	-8.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.74%	24.50%	-6.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.85%	20.80%	-0.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.85%	22.77%	-2.92%

CCNR vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCNR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCNR vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison

CCNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.74%, more than FRDM's 1.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	2.74%	3.48%	1.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	1.51%	2.26%	2.53%	2.66%	2.72%	2.17%	1.11%	1.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCNR and FRDM in my portfolio?

CCNR and FRDM have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCNR or FRDM?

FRDM has higher volatility (11.03%) compared to CCNR (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCNR dropped -20.06% vs FRDM's -40.49%.

Which ETF is better, CCNR or FRDM?

On 1-year performance, FRDM leads with 97.46% vs 69.39% for CCNR. On fees, CCNR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CCNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CCNR or FRDM?

Over the 1-year period, FRDM has performed better with a 97.46% return vs 69.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CCNR or FRDM?

CCNR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for FRDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CCNR or FRDM?

CCNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.74%, compared with 1.51% for FRDM.

What is the main difference between CCNR and FRDM?

CCNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while FRDM is Emerging Markets Diversified. They also come from different issuers: ALPS and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CCNR and 0.49% for FRDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.00 vs 3.94), 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.