GDMN vs. CCOM
GDMN (WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund) and CCOM (Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Commodities funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.14 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GDMN charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for CCOM.
Performance
GDMN vs. CCOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GDMN
- 1D
- 1.66%
- 1M
- -4.40%
- 6M
- -30.05%
- YTD
- -21.29%
- 1Y
- 49.41%
- 3Y*
- 54.79%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 31.15%
CCOM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -1.27%
- 6M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $489.06 | $1.63K | $4.84K | |
| $1.47M | $2.23M | $3.42M |
GDMN vs. CCOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GDMN WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund | -43.37% |
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF | -3.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDMN and CCOM is 0.14, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2026 | 0.14 |
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
GDMN vs. CCOM — Risk / Return Rank
GDMN
CCOM
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GDMN vs. CCOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund (GDMN) 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.
| GDMN | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.95 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.99 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDMN vs. CCOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDMN drawdown since its inception was -52.82%, which is greater than CCOM's maximum drawdown of -7.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMN and CCOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDMN | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.82% | -7.44% | -45.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -52.02% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -48.33% | -5.67% | -42.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.85% | -3.35% | -16.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 24.95% | — | — |
Volatility
GDMN vs. CCOM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDMN | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.93% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 49.31% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 65.05% | 12.48% | +52.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 48.34% | 12.48% | +35.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 48.34% | 12.48% | +35.86% |
GDMN vs. CCOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDMN has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than CCOM's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDMN vs. CCOM - Dividend Comparison
GDMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.43%, more than CCOM's 1.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF | 1.26% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GDMN WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund | 3.43% | 2.70% | 9.44% | 7.69% | 1.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDMN and CCOM have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GDMN is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GDMN is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for CCOM.
GDMN has the higher dividend yield at 3.43%, compared with 1.26% for CCOM.
They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GDMN and 0.99% for CCOM.
Find the right allocation for GDMN and CCOM
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