CMDT vs. CLOZ

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ).

CMDT and CLOZ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CMDT is a passively managed fund by PIMCO that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. It was launched on May 9, 2023. CLOZ is an actively managed fund by Panagram. It was launched on Jan 23, 2023.

Performance

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	16.96%	12.78%	6.93%	5.50%
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF	-1.92%	5.99%	11.85%	11.94%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMDT achieves a 16.96% return, which is significantly higher than CLOZ's -1.92% return.

CMDT

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 8.58%
• YTD: 16.96%
• 6M: 19.62%
• 1Y: 24.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLOZ

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 0.39%
• YTD: -1.92%
• 6M: -0.71%
• 1Y: 4.26%
• 3Y*: 9.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMDT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CLOZ's 0.50% expense ratio.

CMDT

PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund

CLOZ

Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF

Return for Risk

CMDT vs. CLOZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 87
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 86

CLOZ

CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 47
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 64
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ). 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.

	CMDT	CLOZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	0.78	+1.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	1.04	+1.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.22	+0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	1.10	+1.62
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.00	3.53	+6.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMDT Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is higher than the CLOZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMDT and CLOZ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CMDT	CLOZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.85	0.78	+1.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.22	2.51	-1.29

Correlation

The correlation between CMDT and CLOZ is 0.02, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Dividend Comparison

CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, less than CLOZ's 7.97% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.60%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF	7.97%	7.63%	9.09%	8.81%

Drawdowns

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMDT drawdown since its inception was -9.69%, which is greater than CLOZ's maximum drawdown of -5.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMDT and CLOZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMDT	CLOZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.69%	-5.32%	-4.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.21%	-3.90%	-5.31%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-3.15%	+2.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.79%	-0.36%	-2.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.51%	1.22%	+1.29%

Volatility

CMDT vs. CLOZ - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a higher volatility of 5.26% compared to Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) at 1.35%. This indicates that CMDT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLOZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMDT	CLOZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.26%	1.35%	+3.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.59%	2.90%	+6.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.23%	5.48%	+7.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.13%	3.82%	+8.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.13%	3.82%	+8.31%