FLRT vs. CMDT
FLRT (Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FLRT is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Pacific Life, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. FLRT is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLRT returned 8.54%/yr vs 12.77%/yr for CMDT. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLRT charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.
Performance
FLRT vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLRT achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 13.43% return.
FLRT
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 1.89%
- 1Y
- 5.54%
- 3Y*
- 8.54%
- 5Y*
- 5.95%
- 10Y*
- 4.90%
CMDT
- 1D
- -1.14%
- 1M
- -8.86%
- YTD
- 13.43%
- 6M
- 13.42%
- 1Y
- 21.34%
- 3Y*
- 12.77%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLRT vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF | 1.81% | 6.24% | 9.18% | 9.55% |
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 13.43% | 12.78% | 6.93% | 5.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLRT and CMDT is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2023 | 0.04 |
The correlation between FLRT and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.04 (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
FLRT vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank
FLRT
CMDT
FLRT vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) 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.
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.
| FLRT | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.82 | 1.29 | +0.53 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.13 | 1.93 | +1.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.44 | 9.62 | +1.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLRT vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLRT drawdown since its inception was -20.96%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLRT and CMDT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLRT | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.96% | -11.11% | -9.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.78% | -11.11% | +9.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.87% | -11.11% | +8.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -7.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -20.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -11.11% | +10.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.41% | -2.77% | +1.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.49% | 2.25% | -1.76% |
Volatility
FLRT vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) is 0.42%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 3.26%. This indicates that FLRT 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
| FLRT | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 3.26% | -2.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.23% | 10.60% | -9.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59% | 12.65% | -11.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.30% | 12.24% | -9.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.12% | 12.24% | -6.12% |
FLRT vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLRT has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLRT vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison
FLRT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.81%, more than CMDT's 2.67% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.67% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF | 6.81% | 6.93% | 7.93% | 8.40% | 5.81% | 3.16% | 3.52% | 4.30% | 3.95% | 3.20% | 3.38% | 3.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLRT and CMDT have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMDT has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to FLRT (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLRT dropped -20.96% vs CMDT's -11.11%.
On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 12.77% vs 8.54% for FLRT. On fees, CMDT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 12.77% return vs 8.54%. 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 0.69% for FLRT.
FLRT has the higher dividend yield at 6.81%, compared with 2.67% for CMDT.
FLRT is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Pacific Life and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for FLRT and 0.65% for CMDT.
FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 1.71), 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 FLRT 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