IBDW vs. CMDT
IBDW (iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - IBDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg December 2031 Maturity Corporate Index, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBDW returned 5.87%/yr vs 12.77%/yr for CMDT. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. IBDW charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.
Performance
IBDW vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBDW achieves a 0.17% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 13.43% return.
IBDW
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 0.40%
- YTD
- 0.17%
- 6M
- 0.45%
- 1Y
- 4.46%
- 3Y*
- 5.87%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- —
CMDT
- 1D
- -1.14%
- 1M
- -8.86%
- YTD
- 13.43%
- 6M
- 13.42%
- 1Y
- 21.34%
- 3Y*
- 12.77%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBDW vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
IBDW iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF | 0.17% | 9.07% | 2.96% | 5.11% |
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 13.43% | 12.78% | 6.93% | 5.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBDW and CMDT is -0.25, 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 | -0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2023 | -0.08 |
The correlation between IBDW and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to -0.08 (3 years), 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
IBDW vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank
IBDW
CMDT
IBDW vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF (IBDW) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.
| IBDW | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.29 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.85 | 1.93 | -0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.88 | 9.62 | -3.74 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBDW vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBDW drawdown since its inception was -23.87%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBDW and CMDT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBDW | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.87% | -11.11% | -12.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.42% | -11.11% | +8.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.61% | -11.11% | +4.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.87% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.11% | -11.11% | +10.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.37% | -2.77% | -6.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.76% | 2.25% | -1.49% |
Volatility
IBDW vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF (IBDW) is 1.00%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 3.26%. This indicates that IBDW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBDW | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.00% | 3.26% | -2.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.50% | 10.60% | -8.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.48% | 12.65% | -9.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.23% | 12.24% | -5.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.23% | 12.24% | -5.01% |
IBDW vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBDW has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBDW vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison
IBDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.79%, more than CMDT's 2.67% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.67% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBDW iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF | 4.79% | 4.78% | 5.00% | 4.50% | 3.70% | 1.10% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBDW and CMDT have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMDT has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to IBDW (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBDW dropped -23.87% vs CMDT's -11.11%.
On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 12.77% vs 5.87% for IBDW. On fees, IBDW is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBDW has been the lower-risk option at 1.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 12.77% return vs 5.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBDW is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.
IBDW has the higher dividend yield at 4.79%, compared with 2.67% for CMDT.
IBDW is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while CMDT is Commodities. IBDW tracks Bloomberg December 2031 Maturity Corporate Index, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBDW and 0.65% for CMDT.
CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.29), 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 IBDW and CMDT
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