GNMA vs. PIT
GNMA (iShares GNMA Bond ETF) and PIT (VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GNMA is a Mortgage Backed Securities fund tracking the Barclays Capital GNMA Index, while PIT is a Commodities fund actively managed by VanEck. GNMA is passively managed, while PIT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GNMA returned 4.20%/yr vs 19.51%/yr for PIT. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. GNMA charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PIT.
Performance
GNMA vs. PIT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GNMA achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than PIT's 27.31% return.
GNMA
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 0.81%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 1.01%
- 1Y
- 5.85%
- 3Y*
- 4.20%
- 5Y*
- 0.60%
- 10Y*
- 1.20%
PIT
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- -10.60%
- YTD
- 27.31%
- 6M
- 26.74%
- 1Y
- 38.33%
- 3Y*
- 19.51%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GNMA vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | 0.73% | 8.25% | 1.07% | 5.34% | -1.58% |
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF | 27.31% | 21.63% | 6.77% | -4.54% | 1.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between GNMA and PIT is -0.23, 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 | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022 | -0.10 |
The correlation between GNMA and PIT shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to -0.10 (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
GNMA vs. PIT — Risk / Return Rank
GNMA
PIT
GNMA vs. PIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) 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.
| GNMA | PIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.32 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.25 | 2.74 | -0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.76 | 10.88 | -4.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GNMA vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GNMA drawdown since its inception was -17.09%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -14.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNMA and PIT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GNMA | PIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.09% | -14.05% | -3.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.61% | -14.05% | +11.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.13% | -14.05% | +6.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.09% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.24% | -14.05% | +12.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.65% | -4.07% | +0.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.87% | 3.59% | -2.72% |
Volatility
GNMA vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA) is 1.37%, while VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that GNMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GNMA | PIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.37% | 4.67% | -3.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.29% | 19.36% | -16.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.26% | 21.66% | -17.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.63% | 17.50% | -10.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.14% | 17.50% | -12.36% |
GNMA vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison
GNMA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
GNMA vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison
GNMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.23%, less than PIT's 7.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | 4.23% | 4.19% | 4.15% | 3.43% | 2.01% | 0.64% | 1.89% | 2.61% | 2.41% | 2.15% | 1.89% | 1.50% |
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF | 7.00% | 8.92% | 3.59% | 6.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GNMA and PIT have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PIT has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to GNMA (1.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNMA dropped -17.09% vs PIT's -14.05%.
On 3-year performance, PIT leads with 19.51% vs 4.20% for GNMA. On fees, GNMA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, GNMA has been the lower-risk option at 1.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, PIT has performed better with a 19.51% return vs 4.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GNMA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PIT.
PIT has the higher dividend yield at 7.00%, compared with 4.23% for GNMA.
GNMA is categorized as Mortgage Backed Securities, while PIT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for GNMA and 0.55% for PIT.
PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.38), 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 GNMA and PIT
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