DCMT vs. LQDW
DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) and LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine, while LQDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index. DCMT is actively managed, while LQDW is passively managed. Over the past year, DCMT returned 22.10% vs 6.49% for LQDW. At a correlation of -0.17, they often move in opposite directions. DCMT charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for LQDW.
Performance
DCMT vs. LQDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DCMT achieves a 19.96% return, which is significantly higher than LQDW's 1.88% return.
DCMT
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- -11.03%
- YTD
- 19.96%
- 6M
- 18.79%
- 1Y
- 22.10%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQDW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.36%
- YTD
- 1.88%
- 6M
- 2.02%
- 1Y
- 6.49%
- 3Y*
- 3.70%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DCMT vs. LQDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF | 19.96% | 6.04% | 3.65% |
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 1.88% | 9.05% | 2.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between DCMT and LQDW is -0.36, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | -0.17 |
The correlation between DCMT and LQDW shifts across timeframes, from -0.36 (1 year) to -0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. LQDW — Risk / Return Rank
DCMT
LQDW
DCMT vs. LQDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW). 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.
| DCMT | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.36 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.60 | 2.52 | -0.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.23 | 9.34 | -2.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DCMT vs. LQDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DCMT drawdown since its inception was -13.89%, which is greater than LQDW's maximum drawdown of -9.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCMT and LQDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DCMT | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.89% | -9.20% | -4.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.89% | -2.59% | -11.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.89% | -0.04% | -13.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.29% | -2.32% | -0.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.10% | 0.70% | +2.40% |
Volatility
DCMT vs. LQDW - Volatility Comparison
DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW) at 1.00%. This indicates that DCMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQDW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DCMT | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.62% | 1.00% | +3.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.30% | 3.12% | +13.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.53% | 3.62% | +14.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.85% | 5.47% | +10.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.85% | 5.47% | +10.38% |
DCMT vs. LQDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
DCMT has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than LQDW's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
DCMT vs. LQDW - Dividend Comparison
DCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, less than LQDW's 12.49% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF | 3.06% | 3.67% | 1.59% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.49% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DCMT and LQDW have a correlation of -0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DCMT has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to LQDW (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCMT dropped -13.89% vs LQDW's -9.20%.
On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 22.10% vs 6.49% for LQDW. On fees, LQDW is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, LQDW has been the lower-risk option at 1.00%. 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 22.10% return vs 6.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQDW is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DCMT.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.49%, compared with 3.06% for DCMT.
DCMT is categorized as Commodities, while LQDW is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: DoubleLine and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DCMT and 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.21), 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 DCMT and LQDW
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