INVG vs. DCMT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

INVG (GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF) and DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - INVG is a Corporate Bonds fund actively managed by GMO, while DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INVG returned 5.23% vs 22.10% for DCMT. At a correlation of -0.33, they often move in opposite directions. INVG charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for DCMT.

Performance

INVG vs. DCMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INVG achieves a 0.96% return, which is significantly lower than DCMT's 19.96% return.

INVG

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 0.87%
• YTD: 0.96%
• 6M: 1.01%
• 1Y: 5.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DCMT

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: -11.03%
• YTD: 19.96%
• 6M: 18.79%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INVG vs. DCMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF	0.96%	5.03%
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	19.96%	5.73%

Correlation

The correlation between INVG and DCMT is -0.33, 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	-0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	-0.33

Return for Risk

INVG vs. DCMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

INVG

INVG Risk / Return Rank: 36
INVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
INVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
INVG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
INVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
INVG Martin Ratio Rank: 37

DCMT

DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 37
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 34
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

INVG vs. DCMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). 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.

	INVG	DCMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.21	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.74	1.72	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.22	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.67	1.60	+0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.31	7.23	-1.93

INVG vs. DCMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INVG Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the DCMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INVG and DCMT, 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

INVG vs. DCMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INVG drawdown since its inception was -3.15%, smaller than the maximum DCMT drawdown of -13.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INVG and DCMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	INVG	DCMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.15%	-13.89%	+10.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.15%	-13.89%	+10.74%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.61%	-13.89%	+13.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.71%	-3.29%	+2.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	3.10%	-2.11%

Volatility

INVG vs. DCMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) is 1.26%, while DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that INVG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DCMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INVG	DCMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.26%	4.62%	-3.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.41%	16.30%	-12.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.45%	18.53%	-14.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.45%	15.85%	-11.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.45%	15.85%	-11.40%

INVG vs. DCMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

INVG has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than DCMT's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

INVG vs. DCMT - Dividend Comparison

INVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.66%, more than DCMT's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	3.06%	3.67%	1.59%
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF	4.66%	2.81%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INVG and DCMT in my portfolio?

INVG and DCMT have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INVG or DCMT?

DCMT has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to INVG (1.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INVG dropped -3.15% vs DCMT's -13.89%.

Which ETF is better, INVG or DCMT?

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 22.10% vs 5.23% for INVG. On fees, INVG is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, INVG has been the lower-risk option at 1.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INVG or DCMT?

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 22.10% return vs 5.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INVG or DCMT?

INVG is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DCMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INVG or DCMT?

INVG has the higher dividend yield at 4.66%, compared with 3.06% for DCMT.

What is the main difference between INVG and DCMT?

INVG is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while DCMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: GMO and DoubleLine. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for INVG and 0.66% for DCMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DCMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.21 vs 1.18), 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.