FAAR vs. CCOM

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

FAAR (First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF) and CCOM (Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Commodities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FAAR charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for CCOM.

Performance

FAAR vs. CCOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (CCOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FAAR

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: -4.15%
• 6M: 11.51%
• YTD: 16.56%
• 1Y: 23.68%
• 3Y*: 9.29%
• 5Y*: 7.07%
• 10Y*: 4.26%

CCOM

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: -2.31%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FAAR vs. CCOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF	8.45%
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	-4.96%

Correlation

The correlation between FAAR and CCOM is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2026	0.18

Return for Risk

FAAR vs. CCOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAAR

FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 68
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 62

CCOM

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

FAAR vs. CCOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (CCOM). 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.

	FAAR	CCOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.66	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.62	—	—

Drawdowns

FAAR vs. CCOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAAR drawdown since its inception was -18.03%, which is greater than CCOM's maximum drawdown of -7.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAAR and CCOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAAR	CCOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.03%	-7.44%	-10.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.54%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-18.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.32%	-6.90%	-1.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.83%	-3.03%	-4.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FAAR	CCOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.92%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.70%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.90%	12.93%	-0.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.93%	12.93%	-1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.55%	12.93%	-1.38%

FAAR vs. CCOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAAR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than CCOM's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAAR vs. CCOM - Dividend Comparison

FAAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.82%, more than CCOM's 1.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	1.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF	9.82%	11.63%	3.45%	3.20%	5.82%	6.49%	3.05%	1.02%	0.58%	2.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FAAR and CCOM in my portfolio?

FAAR and CCOM have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FAAR or CCOM?

On fees, FAAR is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAAR or CCOM?

FAAR is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for CCOM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FAAR or CCOM?

FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.82%, compared with 1.28% for CCOM.

What is the main difference between FAAR and CCOM?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FAAR and 0.99% for CCOM.