PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GRN vs. PIT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GRN vs. PIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GRN achieves a -8.60% return, which is significantly lower than PIT's 41.36% return.


GRN

1D
-0.42%
1M
8.55%
YTD
-8.60%
6M
-4.48%
1Y
9.03%
3Y*
0.39%
5Y*
9.52%
10Y*

PIT

1D
0.58%
1M
-2.84%
YTD
41.36%
6M
42.58%
1Y
62.93%
3Y*
24.30%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GRN vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
-8.60%20.33%-7.34%-2.99%-7.86%
PIT
VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF
41.36%21.63%6.77%-4.54%2.74%

Correlation

The correlation between GRN and PIT is -0.03, 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

-0.03

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022

0.03

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

GRN vs. PIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRN
GRN Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
GRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRN Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
GRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRN Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

PIT
PIT Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
PIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
PIT Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
PIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
PIT Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GRN vs. PIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) 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.


GRNPITDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.52

-0.44

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.30

6.83

-6.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.77

23.27

-22.50

GRN vs. PIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRN Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the PIT Sharpe Ratio of 2.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRN 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GRNPITDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

2.97

-2.64

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

1.07

-0.66

Drawdowns

GRN vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRN drawdown since its inception was -47.96%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -12.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRN and PIT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GRNPITDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.96%

-12.27%

-35.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.39%

-9.27%

-21.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-45.30%

-12.27%

-33.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.73%

-4.56%

-15.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.54%

-3.99%

-13.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.83%

2.71%

+9.12%

Volatility

GRN vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison

iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) has a higher volatility of 6.65% compared to VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) at 6.08%. This indicates that GRN'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GRNPITDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.65%

6.08%

+0.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.47%

19.02%

+5.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.74%

21.30%

+6.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.82%

17.47%

+22.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

41.95%

17.47%

+24.48%

GRN vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

GRN vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison

GRN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.31%.


PositionTTM202520242023
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PIT
VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF
6.31%8.92%3.59%6.44%

Frequently Asked Questions


GRN and PIT have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GRN has higher volatility (6.65%) compared to PIT (6.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRN dropped -47.96% vs PIT's -12.27%.

On 3-year performance, PIT leads with 24.30% vs 0.39% for GRN. On fees, PIT is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PIT has been the lower-risk option at 6.08%. 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 24.30% return vs 0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PIT is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRN.

PIT has the higher dividend yield at 6.31%, compared with 0.00% for GRN.

They also come from different issuers: Barclays Capital and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRN and 0.55% for PIT.

PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 0.33), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GRN 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