PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
COM vs. FTGC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

COM vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF (COM) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COM achieves a 14.89% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 24.40% return.


COM

1D
0.46%
1M
2.18%
6M
11.52%
YTD
14.89%
1Y
21.16%
3Y*
7.48%
5Y*
8.37%
10Y*

FTGC

1D
1.00%
1M
2.09%
6M
20.91%
YTD
24.40%
1Y
32.56%
3Y*
14.94%
5Y*
12.87%
10Y*
7.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COM vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
COM
Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF
14.89%7.72%5.81%-2.09%9.17%28.00%6.63%-0.18%-0.03%-1.97%
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
24.40%14.61%9.96%-5.36%17.36%27.95%2.17%6.40%-12.75%3.74%

Correlation

The correlation between COM and FTGC is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

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

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 30, 2017

0.67

The correlation between COM and FTGC shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (all time) to 0.86 (1 year), 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

COM vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

COM
COM Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
COM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
COM Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
COM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
COM Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

FTGC
FTGC Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
FTGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTGC Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FTGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTGC 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.

COM vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF (COM) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


COMFTGCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.37

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

2.65

+0.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.31

8.90

-0.59

COM vs. FTGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COM Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the FTGC Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COM and FTGC, 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...

Drawdowns

COM vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COM drawdown since its inception was -15.95%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COM and FTGC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


COMFTGCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.95%

-59.47%

+43.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.63%

-12.34%

+4.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.50%

-12.34%

+3.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.02%

-22.64%

+8.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.60%

-6.71%

+2.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.28%

-27.27%

+20.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.56%

3.67%

-1.11%

Volatility

COM vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF (COM) is 2.01%, while First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) has a volatility of 4.23%. This indicates that COM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


COMFTGCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.01%

4.23%

-2.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.20%

13.37%

-5.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.37%

15.77%

-5.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.50%

15.87%

-6.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.75%

14.72%

-4.97%

COM vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

COM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

COM vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison

COM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, less than FTGC's 15.57% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
COM
Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF
2.53%2.99%3.88%3.80%8.59%10.32%0.13%1.09%2.36%0.09%
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
15.57%17.74%3.05%3.34%10.35%7.21%0.00%0.81%0.80%1.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


COM and FTGC have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FTGC has higher volatility (4.23%) compared to COM (2.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COM dropped -15.95% vs FTGC's -59.47%.

On 5-year performance, FTGC leads with 12.87% vs 8.37% for COM. On fees, COM is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, COM has been the lower-risk option at 2.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 12.87% return vs 8.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

COM is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.

FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 15.57%, compared with 2.53% for COM.

They also come from different issuers: Direxion and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for COM and 0.95% for FTGC.

FTGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 2.05), 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 COM and FTGC

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