PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CMDY vs. BEMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CMDY vs. BEMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY) and Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMDY achieves a 24.16% return, which is significantly higher than BEMB's 1.45% return.


CMDY

1D
-1.01%
1M
-3.07%
YTD
24.16%
6M
23.07%
1Y
35.71%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.49%
10Y*

BEMB

1D
0.18%
1M
0.78%
YTD
1.45%
6M
1.90%
1Y
9.57%
3Y*
8.77%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CMDY vs. BEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CMDY
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF
24.16%15.81%5.43%-3.79%
BEMB
Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
1.45%12.27%5.51%8.88%

Correlation

The correlation between CMDY and BEMB is -0.28, 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

-0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2023

0.02

The correlation between CMDY and BEMB shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CMDY vs. BEMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

CMDY
CMDY Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
CMDY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMDY Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMDY Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
CMDY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMDY Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

BEMB
BEMB Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
BEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
BEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
BEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CMDY vs. BEMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY) and Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB). 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.


CMDYBEMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.44

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.64

2.62

+2.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.86

11.29

+2.56

CMDY vs. BEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMDY Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the BEMB Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMDY and BEMB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CMDYBEMBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.23

2.26

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

1.46

-0.91

Drawdowns

CMDY vs. BEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMDY drawdown since its inception was -31.19%, which is greater than BEMB's maximum drawdown of -6.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMDY and BEMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CMDYBEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.19%

-6.17%

-25.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.73%

-3.67%

-4.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.08%

-6.17%

-3.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.95%

-0.16%

-4.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.14%

-0.94%

-12.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

0.85%

+1.73%

Volatility

CMDY vs. BEMB - Volatility Comparison

iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY) has a higher volatility of 5.11% compared to Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB) at 1.46%. This indicates that CMDY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CMDYBEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.11%

1.46%

+3.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.25%

3.46%

+10.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.10%

4.26%

+11.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.80%

5.88%

+9.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.63%

5.88%

+8.75%

CMDY vs. BEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMDY has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than BEMB's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

CMDY vs. BEMB - Dividend Comparison

CMDY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.38%, more than BEMB's 6.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
BEMB
Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
6.87%6.88%6.31%5.46%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
CMDY
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF
10.38%12.89%4.23%5.10%3.98%16.09%0.15%2.21%1.73%

Frequently Asked Questions


CMDY and BEMB have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CMDY has higher volatility (5.11%) compared to BEMB (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMDY dropped -31.19% vs BEMB's -6.17%.

On 3-year performance, CMDY leads with 15.11% vs 8.77% for BEMB. On fees, BEMB is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BEMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, CMDY has performed better with a 15.11% return vs 8.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BEMB is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for CMDY.

CMDY has the higher dividend yield at 10.38%, compared with 6.87% for BEMB.

CMDY is categorized as Commodities, while BEMB is Emerging Markets Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for CMDY and 0.18% for BEMB.

BEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 2.23), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CMDY and BEMB

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