EAPCX vs. FCSSX
Compare and contrast key facts about Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) and Fidelity Series Commodity Strategy Fund (FCSSX).
EAPCX is managed by Eaton Vance. It was launched on May 25, 2011. FCSSX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Sep 30, 2009.
Performance
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A | 16.34% | 22.06% | 9.63% | -4.87% | 17.26% | 29.92% | 7.77% | 9.19% | -9.60% | 6.71% |
FCSSX Fidelity Series Commodity Strategy Fund | 16.55% | 15.43% | 5.36% | -8.25% | -47.85% | 27.59% | -3.11% | 7.41% | -12.10% | 0.92% |
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with EAPCX having a 16.34% return and FCSSX slightly higher at 16.55%. Over the past 10 years, EAPCX has outperformed FCSSX with an annualized return of 11.09%, while FCSSX has yielded a comparatively lower -1.11% annualized return.
EAPCX
- 1D
- 0.40%
- 1M
- 5.69%
- YTD
- 16.34%
- 6M
- 25.33%
- 1Y
- 32.23%
- 3Y*
- 14.77%
- 5Y*
- 16.00%
- 10Y*
- 11.09%
FCSSX
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 5.27%
- YTD
- 16.55%
- 6M
- 22.88%
- 1Y
- 23.54%
- 3Y*
- 11.27%
- 5Y*
- -4.11%
- 10Y*
- -1.11%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Expense Ratio Comparison
EAPCX has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than FCSSX's 0.00% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
EAPCX vs. FCSSX — Risk / Return Rank
EAPCX
FCSSX
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) and Fidelity Series Commodity Strategy Fund (FCSSX). 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.
| EAPCX | FCSSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.21 | 1.59 | +0.62 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.79 | 2.10 | +0.69 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.29 | +0.11 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.57 | 2.69 | +0.88 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.49 | 7.54 | +4.95 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EAPCX | FCSSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21 | 1.59 | +0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.10 | -0.14 | +1.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 | -0.05 | +0.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.28 | -0.19 | +0.47 |
Correlation
The correlation between EAPCX and FCSSX is 0.90, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Dividend Comparison
EAPCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.37%, more than FCSSX's 2.31% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A | 11.37% | 13.23% | 5.46% | 3.43% | 14.80% | 13.74% | 3.01% | 1.11% | 0.41% | 4.98% | 6.49% |
FCSSX Fidelity Series Commodity Strategy Fund | 2.31% | 2.69% | 12.74% | 4.53% | 1.27% | 41.74% | 0.44% | 1.49% | 6.76% | 0.53% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EAPCX drawdown since its inception was -52.59%, smaller than the maximum FCSSX drawdown of -73.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAPCX and FCSSX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| EAPCX | FCSSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.59% | -73.85% | +21.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.09% | -9.20% | +0.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.05% | -66.47% | +48.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.81% | -66.47% | +37.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.17% | -61.50% | +60.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.03% | -44.50% | +21.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.60% | 3.28% | -0.68% |
Volatility
EAPCX vs. FCSSX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) is 4.61%, while Fidelity Series Commodity Strategy Fund (FCSSX) has a volatility of 5.41%. This indicates that EAPCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCSSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| EAPCX | FCSSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.61% | 5.41% | -0.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.77% | 11.68% | +0.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.87% | 15.47% | -0.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.64% | 28.81% | -14.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.29% | 22.22% | -8.93% |