CUT vs. PICK
CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) and PICK (iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CUT is a Materials fund tracking the Beacon Global Timber Index, while PICK is a Metals fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Metals & Mining Producers ex Gold and Silver Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUT returned 4.61%/yr vs 14.91%/yr for PICK. Their 0.67 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CUT charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for PICK.
Performance
CUT vs. PICK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CUT achieves a 2.55% return, which is significantly lower than PICK's 16.18% return. Over the past 10 years, CUT has underperformed PICK with an annualized return of 4.61%, while PICK has yielded a comparatively higher 14.91% annualized return.
CUT
- 1D
- -0.77%
- 1M
- 5.48%
- 6M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 2.55%
- 1Y
- 3.71%
- 3Y*
- 0.91%
- 5Y*
- -2.27%
- 10Y*
- 4.61%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.07%
PICK
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 2.44%
- 6M
- 2.29%
- YTD
- 16.18%
- 1Y
- 58.79%
- 3Y*
- 15.08%
- 5Y*
- 9.26%
- 10Y*
- 14.91%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.11%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $44.52K | $39.34K | $61.87K | |
| $52.34M | $45.18M | $51.90M |
CUT vs. PICK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.55% | -5.92% | 1.82% | 8.65% | -16.38% | 12.29% | 18.05% | 23.35% | -21.70% | 30.41% |
PICK iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF | 16.18% | 51.89% | -16.37% | 9.69% | 2.54% | 22.61% | 27.46% | 16.47% | -18.65% | 38.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between CUT and PICK is 0.49, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.64 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2012 | 0.67 |
The correlation between CUT and PICK shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.68 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CUT vs. PICK - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CUT
PICK
Consumer Cyclical
-
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Communication Services
-
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
CUT
PICK
-
Basic Materials
CUT
PICK
Real Estate
CUT
PICK
-
Industrials
CUT
PICK
Financial Services
CUT
PICK
Consumer Defensive
CUT
PICK
Technology
CUT
PICK
Communication Services
CUT
-
PICK
-
Energy
CUT
-
PICK
Healthcare
CUT
-
PICK
-
Utilities
CUT
-
PICK
-
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
CUT vs. PICK — Risk / Return Rank
CUT
PICK
CUT vs. PICK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF (PICK). 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.
| CUT | PICK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.96 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.33 | -0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.20 | 2.98 | -2.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.38 | 8.10 | -7.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CUT vs. PICK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CUT drawdown since its inception was -70.03%, roughly equal to the maximum PICK drawdown of -68.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUT and PICK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CUT | PICK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.03% | -68.87% | -1.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.62% | -19.54% | -0.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.23% | -32.52% | +10.29% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.40% | -36.37% | +5.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.76% | -52.72% | +6.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.37% | -13.47% | -2.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.31% | -23.99% | +8.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.44% | 7.17% | +3.27% |
Volatility
CUT vs. PICK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) is 6.63%, while iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF (PICK) has a volatility of 8.26%. This indicates that CUT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PICK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CUT | PICK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.63% | 8.26% | -1.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.11% | 26.71% | -11.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.10% | 30.29% | -11.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.68% | 28.11% | -9.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.10% | 28.29% | -8.19% |
CUT vs. PICK - Expense Ratio Comparison
CUT has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than PICK's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
CUT vs. PICK - Dividend Comparison
CUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than PICK's 2.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.40% | 2.46% | 3.05% | 2.44% | 2.58% | 1.57% | 1.65% | 2.67% | 3.43% | 1.57% | 2.08% | 1.52% |
PICK iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF | 2.23% | 2.88% | 3.26% | 4.19% | 6.93% | 5.89% | 2.27% | 5.51% | 4.77% | 2.41% | 1.15% | 15.77% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CUT and PICK have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PICK has higher volatility (8.26%) compared to CUT (6.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CUT dropped -70.03% vs PICK's -68.87%.
On 10-year performance, PICK leads with 14.91% vs 4.61% for CUT. On fees, PICK is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CUT has been the lower-risk option at 6.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PICK has performed better with a 14.91% return vs 4.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PICK is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.
CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 2.23% for PICK.
CUT is categorized as Materials, while PICK is Metals. CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index, while PICK tracks MSCI ACWI Select Metals & Mining Producers ex Gold and Silver Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CUT and 0.39% for PICK.
PICK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 0.21), 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 CUT and PICK
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