EDGH vs. CMDT
EDGH (3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both Commodities funds. EDGH is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past year, EDGH returned 31.24% vs 35.85% for CMDT. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EDGH charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.
Performance
EDGH vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDGH achieves a 12.49% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 23.96% return.
EDGH
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -1.84%
- YTD
- 12.49%
- 6M
- 14.30%
- 1Y
- 31.24%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMDT
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -0.63%
- YTD
- 23.96%
- 6M
- 24.09%
- 1Y
- 35.85%
- 3Y*
- 16.90%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EDGH vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF | 12.49% | 28.98% | -1.99% |
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 23.96% | 12.78% | -1.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDGH and CMDT is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024 | 0.68 |
The correlation between EDGH and CMDT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
EDGH vs. CMDT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EDGH
CMDT
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
EDGH
CMDT
Basic Materials
EDGH
CMDT
-
Communication Services
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Consumer Cyclical
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Consumer Defensive
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Energy
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Healthcare
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Industrials
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Real Estate
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Technology
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
Utilities
EDGH
-
CMDT
-
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
EDGH vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank
EDGH
CMDT
EDGH vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.
| EDGH | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.50 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | 8.03 | -5.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.70 | 22.12 | -12.42 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EDGH | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.77 | 2.92 | -1.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.53 | 1.32 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
EDGH vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDGH drawdown since its inception was -10.60%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -9.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDGH and CMDT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDGH | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.60% | -9.69% | -0.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.60% | -4.49% | -6.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.80% | -2.86% | -1.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.04% | -2.69% | +0.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | 1.63% | +1.60% |
Volatility
EDGH vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) is 3.01%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that EDGH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EDGH | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.01% | 4.33% | -1.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.72% | 10.30% | +4.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.72% | 12.35% | +5.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.60% | 12.21% | +3.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.60% | 12.21% | +3.39% |
EDGH vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDGH has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDGH vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison
EDGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than CMDT's 2.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.44% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% |
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF | 1.05% | 1.18% | 3.19% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDGH and CMDT have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMDT has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to EDGH (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDGH dropped -10.60% vs CMDT's -9.69%.
On 1-year performance, CMDT leads with 35.85% vs 31.24% for EDGH. On fees, CMDT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EDGH has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 35.85% return vs 31.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMDT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for EDGH.
CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 1.05% for EDGH.
They also come from different issuers: 3EDGE Asset Management and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for EDGH and 0.65% for CMDT.
CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 1.77), 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 EDGH and CMDT
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