COMB vs. BCD
COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) and BCD (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both Commodities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, COMB returned 11.27%/yr vs 11.98%/yr for BCD. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. COMB charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for BCD.
Performance
COMB vs. BCD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COMB achieves a 26.81% return, which is significantly higher than BCD's 20.45% return.
COMB
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -2.98%
- YTD
- 26.81%
- 6M
- 25.89%
- 1Y
- 38.86%
- 3Y*
- 16.31%
- 5Y*
- 11.27%
- 10Y*
- —
BCD
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- -1.43%
- YTD
- 20.45%
- 6M
- 20.51%
- 1Y
- 31.80%
- 3Y*
- 14.44%
- 5Y*
- 11.98%
- 10Y*
- —
COMB vs. BCD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 26.81% | 15.12% | 5.24% | -7.75% | 14.56% | 26.34% | -2.95% | 7.02% | -11.41% | 4.98% |
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 20.45% | 15.71% | 6.20% | -7.58% | 18.38% | 31.87% | 4.76% | 7.34% | -8.65% | 3.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between COMB and BCD is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2017 | 0.89 |
The correlation between COMB and BCD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
COMB vs. BCD — Risk / Return Rank
COMB
BCD
COMB vs. BCD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD). 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.
| COMB | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.43 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.08 | 4.42 | +0.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.24 | 12.57 | +0.68 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| COMB | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.29 | 2.33 | -0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 | 0.78 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.67 | -0.15 |
Drawdowns
COMB vs. BCD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COMB drawdown since its inception was -33.50%, which is greater than BCD's maximum drawdown of -29.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COMB and BCD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COMB | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.50% | -29.81% | -3.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -7.22% | -0.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.35% | -10.50% | -0.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.63% | -23.03% | -3.60% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.35% | -3.60% | -0.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.06% | -9.86% | -2.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.94% | 2.54% | +0.40% |
Volatility
COMB vs. BCD - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) has a higher volatility of 5.14% compared to abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD) at 4.33%. This indicates that COMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BCD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COMB | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.14% | 4.33% | +0.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.99% | 11.74% | +3.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.02% | 13.72% | +3.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.70% | 15.41% | +1.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.13% | 13.90% | +1.23% |
COMB vs. BCD - Expense Ratio Comparison
COMB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than BCD's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
COMB vs. BCD - Dividend Comparison
COMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.14%, less than BCD's 14.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 14.29% | 17.21% | 3.60% | 4.51% | 5.21% | 8.30% | 1.29% | 1.55% | 1.59% | 0.07% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 7.14% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, COMB and BCD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
COMB has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to BCD (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COMB dropped -33.50% vs BCD's -29.81%.
On 5-year performance, BCD leads with 11.98% vs 11.27% for COMB. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BCD 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 5-year period, BCD has performed better with a 11.98% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for BCD.
BCD has the higher dividend yield at 14.29%, compared with 7.14% for COMB.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for COMB and 0.29% for BCD.
BCD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 2.29), 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 COMB and BCD
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