FCGCX vs. PCLPX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FCGCX (Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C) and PCLPX (PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2) are both Commodities funds. Over the past 10 years, FCGCX returned 11.48%/yr vs 10.81%/yr for PCLPX. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FCGCX charges 1.97%/yr vs 0.92%/yr for PCLPX.

Performance

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) and PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCGCX achieves a 15.41% return, which is significantly lower than PCLPX's 25.15% return. Over the past 10 years, FCGCX has outperformed PCLPX with an annualized return of 11.48%, while PCLPX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.81% annualized return.

FCGCX

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -5.64%
• YTD: 15.41%
• 6M: 14.75%
• 1Y: 35.13%
• 3Y*: 16.37%
• 5Y*: 11.83%
• 10Y*: 11.48%

PCLPX

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: -9.67%
• YTD: 25.15%
• 6M: 22.59%
• 1Y: 27.44%
• 3Y*: 13.00%
• 5Y*: 13.50%
• 10Y*: 10.81%

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

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	15.41%	27.29%	1.90%	-6.06%	19.45%	24.85%	4.96%	16.74%	-14.07%	17.33%
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2	25.15%	4.45%	5.92%	0.24%	23.04%	43.50%	-9.12%	19.39%	-12.15%	10.53%

Correlation

The correlation between FCGCX and PCLPX is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2010	0.60

The correlation between FCGCX and PCLPX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FCGCX vs. PCLPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCGCX

FCGCX Risk / Return Rank: 64
FCGCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FCGCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
FCGCX Omega Ratio Rank: 48
FCGCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
FCGCX Martin Ratio Rank: 81

PCLPX

PCLPX Risk / Return Rank: 27
PCLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
PCLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
PCLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 22
PCLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
PCLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) and PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX). 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.

	FCGCX	PCLPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	1.26	+0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	1.74	+0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.23	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	1.90	+2.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.12	8.06	+6.07

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCGCX Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is higher than the PCLPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCGCX and PCLPX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCGCX drawdown since its inception was -59.67%, smaller than the maximum PCLPX drawdown of -66.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCGCX and PCLPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCGCX	PCLPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.67%	-66.98%	+7.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.79%	-12.87%	+4.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.96%	-13.55%	-6.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.43%	-21.53%	-5.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.31%	-51.87%	+2.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.51%	-12.87%	+4.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.16%	-24.60%	+3.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	3.42%	-0.97%

Volatility

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) has a higher volatility of 5.38% compared to PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) at 4.59%. This indicates that FCGCX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PCLPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCGCX	PCLPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.38%	4.59%	+0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.88%	17.15%	-3.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.03%	19.47%	-2.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.39%	19.53%	+1.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.44%	40.63%	-18.19%

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCGCX has a 1.97% expense ratio, which is higher than PCLPX's 0.92% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCGCX vs. PCLPX - Dividend Comparison

FCGCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than PCLPX's 11.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	1.28%	1.48%	1.38%	0.80%	1.09%	2.41%	0.59%	1.94%	1.11%	0.36%	0.71%	1.49%
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2	11.31%	1.31%	5.22%	4.65%	43.16%	74.10%	0.71%	2.39%	18.62%	12.52%	0.15%	1.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCGCX and PCLPX in my portfolio?

FCGCX and PCLPX have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCGCX or PCLPX?

FCGCX has higher volatility (5.38%) compared to PCLPX (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCGCX dropped -59.67% vs PCLPX's -66.98%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCGCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.26), 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.