ISCMF vs. PZA
ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) and PZA (Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ISCMF is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index, while PZA is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the BofA ML National Long-Term Core Plus Municipal Securities Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ISCMF returned 10.82%/yr vs 2.91%/yr for PZA. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. ISCMF charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for PZA.
Performance
ISCMF vs. PZA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISCMF achieves a 11.96% return, which is significantly higher than PZA's 2.48% return.
ISCMF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -8.88%
- 6M
- 11.96%
- YTD
- 11.96%
- 1Y
- 22.55%
- 3Y*
- 10.82%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PZA
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- 6M
- 1.78%
- YTD
- 2.48%
- 1Y
- 9.66%
- 3Y*
- 2.91%
- 5Y*
- -0.21%
- 10Y*
- 1.75%
ISCMF vs. PZA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF | 11.96% | 19.65% | 3.13% | -9.58% | -5.82% |
PZA Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.48% | 1.81% | 0.81% | 8.64% | -7.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISCMF and PZA is -0.13, 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 | -0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 17, 2022 | -0.04 |
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. PZA — Risk / Return Rank
ISCMF
PZA
ISCMF vs. PZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) and Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PZA). 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.
| ISCMF | PZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.84 | 1.52 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.66 | 3.05 | -1.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.41 | 12.16 | -5.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISCMF vs. PZA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISCMF drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, roughly equal to the maximum PZA drawdown of -24.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISCMF and PZA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISCMF | PZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.42% | -24.49% | -0.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.68% | -3.18% | -10.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.68% | -7.89% | -5.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -21.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.68% | -1.09% | -12.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.31% | -3.93% | -9.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.53% | 0.80% | +2.73% |
Volatility
ISCMF vs. PZA - Volatility Comparison
iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) has a higher volatility of 9.30% compared to Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PZA) at 1.03%. This indicates that ISCMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISCMF | PZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.30% | 1.03% | +8.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.12% | 3.05% | +15.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.58% | 4.17% | +15.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.82% | 6.01% | +8.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.82% | 7.08% | +7.74% |
ISCMF vs. PZA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISCMF has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than PZA's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISCMF vs. PZA - Dividend Comparison
ISCMF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.67%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PZA Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.67% | 3.55% | 3.22% | 2.91% | 2.68% | 2.34% | 2.44% | 2.81% | 3.19% | 3.04% | 3.23% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ISCMF and PZA have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISCMF has higher volatility (9.30%) compared to PZA (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISCMF dropped -25.42% vs PZA's -24.49%.
On 3-year performance, ISCMF leads with 10.82% vs 2.91% for PZA. On fees, ISCMF is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, PZA has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, ISCMF has performed better with a 10.82% return vs 2.91%. 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 0.28% for PZA.
PZA has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.
ISCMF is categorized as Commodities, while PZA is Municipal Bonds. ISCMF tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index, while PZA tracks BofA ML National Long-Term Core Plus Municipal Securities Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ISCMF and 0.28% for PZA.
PZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.16), 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 PZA
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