FTMN vs. PDBC
FTMN (Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF) and PDBC (Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Actively Managed, while PDBC is a Commodities fund actively managed by Invesco. FTMN is passively managed, while PDBC is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.28, they often move in opposite directions. FTMN charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PDBC.
Performance
FTMN vs. PDBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTMN achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly lower than PDBC's 22.11% return.
FTMN
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.99%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 2.21%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PDBC
- 1D
- -1.10%
- 1M
- -11.10%
- YTD
- 22.11%
- 6M
- 20.75%
- 1Y
- 25.24%
- 3Y*
- 10.03%
- 5Y*
- 9.92%
- 10Y*
- 7.59%
FTMN vs. PDBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF | 1.81% | 0.27% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 22.11% | 0.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTMN and PDBC is -0.28, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2025 | -0.28 |
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
FTMN vs. PDBC — Risk / Return Rank
FTMN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PDBC
FTMN vs. PDBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) and Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC). 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.
| FTMN | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.24 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.76 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.71 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FTMN vs. PDBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTMN drawdown since its inception was -3.10%, smaller than the maximum PDBC drawdown of -49.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMN and PDBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTMN | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.10% | -49.52% | +46.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -14.44% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.44% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.13% | -14.44% | +14.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.69% | -23.14% | +22.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.31% | — |
Volatility
FTMN vs. PDBC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTMN | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.42% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 16.20% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.15% | 18.73% | -14.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.15% | 19.15% | -15.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.15% | 17.77% | -13.62% |
FTMN vs. PDBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTMN has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PDBC's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTMN vs. PDBC - Dividend Comparison
FTMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than PDBC's 3.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTMN Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF | 1.83% | 0.50% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 3.14% | 3.84% | 4.42% | 4.21% | 13.05% | 50.83% | 0.01% | 1.40% | 1.00% | 3.83% | 6.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTMN and PDBC have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FTMN is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FTMN is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for PDBC.
PDBC has the higher dividend yield at 3.14%, compared with 1.83% for FTMN.
FTMN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while PDBC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMN and 0.58% for PDBC.
Find the right allocation for FTMN and PDBC
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