COMB vs. CMCI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) and CMCI (VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF) are both Commodities funds. COMB is actively managed, while CMCI is passively managed. Over the past year, COMB returned 38.86% vs 30.85% for CMCI. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. COMB charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMCI.

Performance

COMB vs. CMCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) and VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COMB achieves a 26.81% return, which is significantly higher than CMCI's 23.01% return.

COMB

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -2.98%
• YTD: 26.81%
• 6M: 25.89%
• 1Y: 38.86%
• 3Y*: 16.31%
• 5Y*: 11.27%
• 10Y*: —

CMCI

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -0.41%
• YTD: 23.01%
• 6M: 23.83%
• 1Y: 30.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COMB vs. CMCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF	26.81%	15.12%	5.24%	-3.23%
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF	23.01%	7.90%	5.68%	-2.87%

Correlation

The correlation between COMB and CMCI is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 24, 2023	0.88

The correlation between COMB and CMCI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

COMB vs. CMCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

COMB

COMB Risk / Return Rank: 71
COMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
COMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
COMB Omega Ratio Rank: 68
COMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
COMB Martin Ratio Rank: 71

CMCI

CMCI Risk / Return Rank: 81
CMCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CMCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
CMCI Omega Ratio Rank: 77
CMCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CMCI Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

COMB vs. CMCI - 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 VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI). 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	CMCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	2.54	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	3.42	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.46	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.08	6.16	-1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.24	16.15	-2.91
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COMB vs. CMCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the CMCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COMB and CMCI, 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

	COMB	CMCI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	2.54	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.94	-0.42

Drawdowns

COMB vs. CMCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COMB drawdown since its inception was -33.50%, which is greater than CMCI's maximum drawdown of -11.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COMB and CMCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	COMB	CMCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.50%	-11.54%	-21.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.69%	-5.03%	-2.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.35%	-3.12%	-1.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.06%	-3.54%	-8.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	1.92%	+1.02%

Volatility

COMB vs. CMCI - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) has a higher volatility of 5.14% compared to VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI) at 4.25%. This indicates that COMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COMB	CMCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.14%	4.25%	+0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.99%	10.14%	+4.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.02%	12.19%	+4.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.70%	12.63%	+4.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.13%	12.63%	+2.50%

COMB vs. CMCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

COMB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CMCI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

COMB vs. CMCI - Dividend Comparison

COMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.14%, less than CMCI's 8.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF	8.04%	9.89%	3.93%	1.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both COMB and CMCI in my portfolio?

COMB and CMCI have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COMB or CMCI?

COMB has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to CMCI (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COMB dropped -33.50% vs CMCI's -11.54%.

Which ETF is better, COMB or CMCI?

On 1-year performance, COMB leads with 38.86% vs 30.85% for CMCI. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CMCI has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COMB or CMCI?

Over the 1-year period, COMB has performed better with a 38.86% return vs 30.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COMB or CMCI?

COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMCI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COMB or CMCI?

CMCI has the higher dividend yield at 8.04%, compared with 7.14% for COMB.

What is the main difference between COMB and CMCI?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for COMB and 0.65% for CMCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 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.