GGRW vs. PIT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

GGRW (Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF) and PIT (VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by GAMCO Investors, Inc., while PIT is a Commodities fund actively managed by VanEck. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GGRW returned 25.98%/yr vs 19.51%/yr for PIT. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GGRW charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PIT.

Performance

GGRW vs. PIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GGRW achieves a 6.10% return, which is significantly lower than PIT's 27.31% return.

GGRW

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 6.10%
• 6M: 5.75%
• 1Y: 17.78%
• 3Y*: 25.98%
• 5Y*: 8.54%
• 10Y*: —

PIT

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: -10.60%
• YTD: 27.31%
• 6M: 26.74%
• 1Y: 38.33%
• 3Y*: 19.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GGRW vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GGRW Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF	6.10%	18.29%	41.78%	42.19%	-2.56%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	27.31%	21.63%	6.77%	-4.54%	1.67%

Correlation

The correlation between GGRW and PIT is -0.14, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022	0.03

The correlation between GGRW and PIT shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GGRW vs. PIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGRW

GGRW Risk / Return Rank: 32
GGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
GGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
GGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 35

PIT

PIT Risk / Return Rank: 55
PIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
PIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
PIT Omega Ratio Rank: 52
PIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
PIT Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

GGRW vs. PIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). 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.

	GGRW	PIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	1.78	-0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	2.32	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.32	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.35	2.74	-1.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.05	10.88	-5.83

GGRW vs. PIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the PIT Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGRW and PIT, 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

GGRW vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGRW drawdown since its inception was -50.28%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -14.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGRW and PIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	GGRW	PIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.28%	-14.05%	-36.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.19%	-14.05%	+0.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.53%	-14.05%	-6.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-14.05%	+12.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.24%	-4.07%	-13.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.53%	3.59%	-0.06%

Volatility

GGRW vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison

Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) has a higher volatility of 5.83% compared to VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) at 4.67%. This indicates that GGRW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GGRW	PIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.83%	4.67%	+1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.52%	19.36%	-6.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.59%	21.66%	-6.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.41%	17.50%	+7.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.48%	17.50%	+7.98%

GGRW vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGRW has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

GGRW vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison

GGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, less than PIT's 7.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GGRW Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF	0.40%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	7.00%	8.92%	3.59%	6.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GGRW and PIT in my portfolio?

GGRW and PIT 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.

Which is riskier, GGRW or PIT?

GGRW has higher volatility (5.83%) compared to PIT (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GGRW dropped -50.28% vs PIT's -14.05%.

Which ETF is better, GGRW or PIT?

On 3-year performance, GGRW leads with 25.98% vs 19.51% for PIT. On fees, PIT is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PIT has been the lower-risk option at 4.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GGRW or PIT?

Over the 3-year period, GGRW has performed better with a 25.98% return vs 19.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GGRW or PIT?

PIT is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for GGRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GGRW or PIT?

PIT has the higher dividend yield at 7.00%, compared with 0.40% for GGRW.

What is the main difference between GGRW and PIT?

GGRW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while PIT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: GAMCO Investors, Inc. and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for GGRW and 0.55% for PIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.15), 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.