PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DCMT vs. GRN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DCMT vs. GRN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DCMT achieves a 22.10% return, which is significantly higher than GRN's -7.57% return.


DCMT

1D
-0.37%
1M
-9.77%
YTD
22.10%
6M
23.26%
1Y
20.95%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GRN

1D
0.21%
1M
6.34%
YTD
-7.57%
6M
-7.02%
1Y
10.36%
3Y*
-4.27%
5Y*
9.11%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DCMT vs. GRN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
DCMT
DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF
22.10%6.04%3.65%
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
-7.57%20.33%14.91%

Correlation

The correlation between DCMT and GRN is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024

0.05

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

DCMT vs. GRN — Risk / Return Rank

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

DCMT
DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

GRN
GRN Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
GRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRN Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
GRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRN Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
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.

DCMT vs. GRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN). 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.


DCMTGRNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.07

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.71

0.25

+1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.57

0.63

+5.94

DCMT vs. GRN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DCMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is higher than the GRN Sharpe Ratio of 0.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DCMT and GRN, 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

DCMT vs. GRN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DCMT drawdown since its inception was -12.36%, smaller than the maximum GRN drawdown of -47.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCMT and GRN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DCMTGRNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.36%

-47.96%

+35.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.36%

-30.39%

+18.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-44.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.36%

-18.83%

+6.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.25%

-17.55%

+14.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.22%

12.06%

-8.84%

Volatility

DCMT vs. GRN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) is 4.97%, while iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) has a volatility of 5.86%. This indicates that DCMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DCMTGRNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.97%

5.86%

-0.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.27%

24.68%

-8.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.48%

27.77%

-9.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.85%

39.80%

-23.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.85%

41.83%

-25.98%

DCMT vs. GRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

DCMT has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than GRN's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

DCMT vs. GRN - Dividend Comparison

DCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, while GRN has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024
DCMT
DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF
3.01%3.67%1.59%
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


DCMT and GRN have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GRN has higher volatility (5.86%) compared to DCMT (4.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCMT dropped -12.36% vs GRN's -47.96%.

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 20.95% vs 10.36% for GRN. On fees, DCMT is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, DCMT has been the lower-risk option at 4.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 20.95% return vs 10.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DCMT is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRN.

DCMT has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 0.00% for GRN.

They also come from different issuers: DoubleLine and Barclays Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DCMT and 0.75% for GRN.

DCMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs 0.27), 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 DCMT and GRN

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