CMDT vs. PYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) and PYLD (PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index, while PYLD is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by PIMCO. CMDT is passively managed, while PYLD is actively managed. Over the past year, CMDT returned 35.85% vs 7.40% for PYLD. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. CMDT charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PYLD.

Performance

CMDT vs. PYLD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMDT achieves a 23.96% return, which is significantly higher than PYLD's 0.95% return.

CMDT

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

PYLD

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 1.31%
• 1Y: 7.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CMDT vs. PYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	23.96%	12.78%	6.93%	4.24%
PYLD PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	0.95%	9.57%	7.69%	5.60%

Correlation

The correlation between CMDT and PYLD is -0.20, 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	-0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2023	-0.02

The correlation between CMDT and PYLD shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CMDT vs. PYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CMDT	PYLD
Financial Services	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CMDT vs. PYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

PYLD

PYLD Risk / Return Rank: 66
PYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
PYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
PYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
PYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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. PYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD). 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	PYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.92	2.42	+0.50
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.92	3.56	+0.36
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.48	+0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.03	2.29	+5.74
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	22.12	10.44	+11.68
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. PYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMDT Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the PYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMDT and PYLD, 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

	CMDT	PYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.92	2.42	+0.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.32	2.04	-0.72

Drawdowns

CMDT vs. PYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMDT drawdown since its inception was -9.69%, which is greater than PYLD's maximum drawdown of -4.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMDT and PYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMDT	PYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.69%	-4.52%	-5.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.49%	-3.25%	-1.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.86%	-0.44%	-2.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.69%	-0.65%	-2.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.63%	0.71%	+0.92%

Volatility

CMDT vs. PYLD - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a higher volatility of 4.33% compared to PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD) at 1.24%. This indicates that CMDT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMDT	PYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	1.24%	+3.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.30%	2.50%	+7.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.35%	3.08%	+9.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.21%	3.99%	+8.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.21%	3.99%	+8.22%

CMDT vs. PYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMDT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than PYLD's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

CMDT vs. PYLD - Dividend Comparison

CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, less than PYLD's 6.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.44%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
PYLD PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	6.30%	6.21%	6.40%	2.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CMDT and PYLD in my portfolio?

CMDT and PYLD have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CMDT or PYLD?

CMDT has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to PYLD (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMDT dropped -9.69% vs PYLD's -4.52%.

Which ETF is better, CMDT or PYLD?

On 1-year performance, CMDT leads with 35.85% vs 7.40% for PYLD. On fees, PYLD is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CMDT or PYLD?

Over the 1-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 35.85% return vs 7.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CMDT or PYLD?

PYLD is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

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

PYLD has the higher dividend yield at 6.30%, compared with 2.44% for CMDT.

What is the main difference between CMDT and PYLD?

CMDT is categorized as Commodities, while PYLD is Multisector Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CMDT and 0.55% for PYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.42), 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.