CMDT vs. USE
CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) and USE (USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund) are both Commodities funds. CMDT is passively managed, while USE is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CMDT returned 16.90%/yr vs 17.85%/yr for USE. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CMDT charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for USE.
Performance
CMDT vs. USE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMDT achieves a 23.96% return, which is significantly lower than USE's 48.69% return.
CMDT
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -0.63%
- YTD
- 23.96%
- 6M
- 24.09%
- 1Y
- 35.85%
- 3Y*
- 16.90%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
USE
- 1D
- 2.75%
- 1M
- -2.96%
- YTD
- 48.69%
- 6M
- 51.72%
- 1Y
- 41.25%
- 3Y*
- 17.85%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMDT vs. USE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 23.96% | 12.78% | 6.93% | 5.50% |
USE USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund | 48.69% | -14.97% | 22.58% | 5.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMDT and USE is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023 | 0.62 |
The correlation between CMDT and USE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.
CMDT vs. USE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CMDT
USE
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
CMDT
USE
Basic Materials
CMDT
-
USE
-
Communication Services
CMDT
-
USE
-
Consumer Cyclical
CMDT
-
USE
-
Consumer Defensive
CMDT
-
USE
-
Energy
CMDT
-
USE
-
Healthcare
CMDT
-
USE
-
Industrials
CMDT
-
USE
-
Real Estate
CMDT
-
USE
-
Technology
CMDT
-
USE
-
Utilities
CMDT
-
USE
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CMDT vs. USE — Risk / Return Rank
CMDT
USE
CMDT vs. USE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE). 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 | USE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.92 | 1.32 | +1.60 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.92 | 1.94 | +1.98 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.23 | +0.27 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 8.03 | 1.58 | +6.45 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.12 | 3.10 | +19.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CMDT | USE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92 | 1.32 | +1.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.32 | 0.70 | +0.62 |
Drawdowns
CMDT vs. USE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMDT drawdown since its inception was -9.69%, smaller than the maximum USE drawdown of -26.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMDT and USE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMDT | USE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.69% | -26.24% | +16.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.49% | -26.24% | +21.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.69% | -26.24% | +16.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.86% | -4.44% | +1.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.69% | -7.96% | +5.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.63% | 13.32% | -11.69% |
Volatility
CMDT vs. USE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) is 4.33%, while USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) has a volatility of 11.11%. This indicates that CMDT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMDT | USE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.33% | 11.11% | -6.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.30% | 25.86% | -15.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.35% | 31.46% | -19.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.21% | 27.06% | -14.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.21% | 27.06% | -14.85% |
CMDT vs. USE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMDT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than USE's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMDT vs. USE - Dividend Comparison
CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, more than USE's 2.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.44% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% |
USE USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund | 2.06% | 3.06% | 38.65% | 4.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CMDT and USE have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
USE has higher volatility (11.11%) compared to CMDT (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMDT dropped -9.69% vs USE's -26.24%.
On 3-year performance, USE leads with 17.85% vs 16.90% for CMDT. On fees, CMDT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CMDT has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, USE has performed better with a 17.85% return vs 16.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMDT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for USE.
CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 2.06% for USE.
They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CMDT and 0.79% for USE.
CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 1.32), 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.
Find the right allocation for CMDT and USE
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer