COMB vs. PIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) and PIT (VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF) are both Commodities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, COMB returned 16.31%/yr vs 24.30%/yr for PIT. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. COMB charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PIT.

Performance

COMB vs. PIT - 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 Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). 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 lower than PIT's 41.36% return.

COMB

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

PIT

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: -2.84%
• YTD: 41.36%
• 6M: 42.58%
• 1Y: 62.93%
• 3Y*: 24.30%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COMB vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF	26.81%	15.12%	5.24%	-7.75%	1.15%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	41.36%	21.63%	6.77%	-4.54%	2.74%

Correlation

The correlation between COMB and PIT is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022	0.88

The correlation between COMB and PIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

COMB vs. PIT — 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

PIT

PIT Risk / Return Rank: 87
PIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PIT Omega Ratio Rank: 84
PIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
PIT Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. PIT - 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 Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). 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	PIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	2.97	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	3.53	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.52	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.08	6.83	-1.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.24	23.27	-10.03
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. PIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the PIT Sharpe Ratio of 2.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COMB and PIT, 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	PIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	2.97	-0.68
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	1.07	-0.55

Drawdowns

COMB vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COMB drawdown since its inception was -33.50%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -12.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COMB and PIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	COMB	PIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.50%	-12.27%	-21.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.69%	-9.27%	+1.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.35%	-12.27%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.35%	-4.56%	+0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.06%	-3.99%	-8.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	2.71%	+0.23%

Volatility

COMB vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) is 5.14%, while VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) has a volatility of 6.08%. This indicates that COMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COMB	PIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.14%	6.08%	-0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.99%	19.02%	-4.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.02%	21.30%	-4.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.70%	17.47%	-0.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.13%	17.47%	-2.34%

COMB vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

COMB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

COMB vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison

COMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.14%, more than PIT's 6.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	6.31%	8.92%	3.59%	6.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COMB and PIT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, COMB and PIT 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.

Which is riskier, COMB or PIT?

PIT has higher volatility (6.08%) compared to COMB (5.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COMB dropped -33.50% vs PIT's -12.27%.

Which ETF is better, COMB or PIT?

On 3-year performance, PIT leads with 24.30% vs 16.31% for COMB. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, COMB has been the lower-risk option at 5.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COMB or PIT?

Over the 3-year period, PIT has performed better with a 24.30% return vs 16.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COMB or PIT?

COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PIT.

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

COMB has the higher dividend yield at 7.14%, compared with 6.31% for PIT.

What is the main difference between COMB and PIT?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for COMB and 0.55% for PIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 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.