ISCMF vs. FTGC
ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) and FTGC (First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund) are both Commodities funds. ISCMF is passively managed, while FTGC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ISCMF returned 15.20%/yr vs 18.13%/yr for FTGC. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ISCMF charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FTGC.
Performance
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISCMF achieves a 22.87% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 27.15% return.
ISCMF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- 22.87%
- 6M
- 27.76%
- 1Y
- 37.85%
- 3Y*
- 15.20%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FTGC
- 1D
- -0.44%
- 1M
- -2.63%
- YTD
- 27.15%
- 6M
- 26.06%
- 1Y
- 41.32%
- 3Y*
- 18.13%
- 5Y*
- 13.08%
- 10Y*
- 7.77%
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF | 22.87% | 19.65% | 3.13% | -9.58% | -5.08% |
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 27.15% | 14.61% | 9.96% | -5.36% | -3.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISCMF and FTGC is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022 | 0.07 |
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
ISCMF vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank
ISCMF
FTGC
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.
| ISCMF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.53 | 1.47 | +1.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.69 | 5.25 | +1.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.68 | 17.39 | -1.71 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ISCMF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.05 | 2.66 | -0.61 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.82 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 0.24 | +0.21 |
Drawdowns
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISCMF drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISCMF and FTGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISCMF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.42% | -59.47% | +34.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.69% | -7.91% | +2.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.62% | -10.39% | +2.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.26% | -4.65% | -0.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.43% | -27.42% | +13.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.42% | 2.38% | +0.04% |
Volatility
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison
iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) has a higher volatility of 7.14% compared to First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) at 4.50%. This indicates that ISCMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISCMF | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.14% | 4.50% | +2.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.90% | 13.15% | +2.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.53% | 15.59% | +2.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.38% | 16.00% | -1.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.38% | 14.71% | -0.33% |
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISCMF has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISCMF vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison
ISCMF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FTGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.08%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 15.08% | 17.74% | 3.05% | 3.34% | 10.35% | 7.21% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 0.80% | 1.21% |
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ISCMF and FTGC have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISCMF has higher volatility (7.14%) compared to FTGC (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISCMF dropped -25.42% vs FTGC's -59.47%.
On 3-year performance, FTGC leads with 18.13% vs 15.20% for ISCMF. On fees, ISCMF is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FTGC has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 18.13% return vs 15.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISCMF is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.
FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 15.08%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ISCMF and 0.95% for FTGC.
FTGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 2.05), 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 ISCMF and FTGC
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