ISCMF vs. GRN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) and GRN (iPath Series B Carbon ETN) are both Commodities funds - ISCMF tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Index while GRN tracks the Barclays Global Carbon II Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ISCMF returned 15.20%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for GRN. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. ISCMF charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRN.

Performance

ISCMF vs. GRN - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISCMF achieves a 22.87% return, which is significantly higher than GRN's -8.60% return.

ISCMF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.67%
• YTD: 22.87%
• 6M: 27.76%
• 1Y: 37.85%
• 3Y*: 15.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRN

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

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

ISCMF vs. GRN - 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%
GRN iPath Series B Carbon ETN	-8.60%	20.33%	-7.34%	-2.99%	0.66%

Correlation

The correlation between ISCMF and GRN is -0.06, 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	-0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022	-0.04

Return for Risk

ISCMF vs. GRN — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISCMF

ISCMF Risk / Return Rank: 83
ISCMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
ISCMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ISCMF Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ISCMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
ISCMF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

GRN

GRN Risk / Return Rank: 13
GRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
GRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
GRN Omega Ratio Rank: 14
GRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
GRN Martin Ratio Rank: 13

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.

ISCMF vs. GRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) and iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN). 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	GRN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	0.33	+1.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.74	0.61	+3.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.53	1.08	+1.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.69	0.30	+6.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.68	0.77	+14.92
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ISCMF vs. GRN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISCMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is higher than the GRN Sharpe Ratio of 0.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISCMF and GRN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ISCMF	GRN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	0.33	+1.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.24	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.42	+0.04

Drawdowns

ISCMF vs. GRN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISCMF drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, smaller than the maximum GRN drawdown of -47.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISCMF and GRN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISCMF	GRN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.42%	-47.96%	+22.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.69%	-30.39%	+24.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.62%	-45.30%	+37.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-47.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.26%	-19.73%	+14.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-17.54%	+4.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.42%	11.83%	-9.41%

Volatility

ISCMF vs. GRN - Volatility Comparison

iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) has a higher volatility of 7.14% compared to iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) at 6.65%. This indicates that ISCMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISCMF	GRN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.14%	6.65%	+0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.90%	24.47%	-8.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.53%	27.74%	-9.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.38%	39.82%	-25.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.38%	41.95%	-27.57%

ISCMF vs. GRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISCMF has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than GRN's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISCMF vs. GRN - Dividend Comparison

Neither ISCMF nor GRN has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISCMF and GRN in my portfolio?

ISCMF and GRN have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISCMF or GRN?

ISCMF has higher volatility (7.14%) compared to GRN (6.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISCMF dropped -25.42% vs GRN's -47.96%.

Which ETF is better, ISCMF or GRN?

On 3-year performance, ISCMF leads with 15.20% vs 0.39% for GRN. On fees, ISCMF is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, GRN has been the lower-risk option at 6.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ISCMF or GRN?

Over the 3-year period, ISCMF has performed better with a 15.20% return vs 0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISCMF or GRN?

ISCMF is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ISCMF or GRN?

ISCMF and GRN have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between ISCMF and GRN?

ISCMF tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index, while GRN tracks Barclays Global Carbon II Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Barclays Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ISCMF and 0.75% for GRN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ISCMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 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.