IWM vs. PDBC
IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and PDBC (Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while PDBC is a Commodities fund actively managed by Invesco. IWM is passively managed, while PDBC is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 11.40%/yr vs 7.87%/yr for PDBC. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PDBC.
Performance
IWM vs. PDBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 20.19% return, which is significantly lower than PDBC's 27.47% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has outperformed PDBC with an annualized return of 11.40%, while PDBC has yielded a comparatively lower 7.87% annualized return.
IWM
- 1D
- 0.82%
- 1M
- 6.39%
- YTD
- 20.19%
- 6M
- 17.83%
- 1Y
- 42.91%
- 3Y*
- 17.97%
- 5Y*
- 6.41%
- 10Y*
- 11.40%
PDBC
- 1D
- -1.00%
- 1M
- -9.24%
- YTD
- 27.47%
- 6M
- 29.29%
- 1Y
- 29.58%
- 3Y*
- 10.66%
- 5Y*
- 11.09%
- 10Y*
- 7.87%
IWM vs. PDBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 20.19% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 27.47% | 5.96% | 2.09% | -6.25% | 19.23% | 41.72% | -7.84% | 11.44% | -12.78% | 5.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and PDBC is -0.14, 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 | -0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2014 | 0.26 |
The correlation between IWM and PDBC shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.26 (all time), 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
IWM vs. PDBC — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
PDBC
IWM vs. PDBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC). 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.
| IWM | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.28 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.91 | 2.78 | +1.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.84 | 7.99 | +5.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWM vs. PDBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than PDBC's maximum drawdown of -49.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and PDBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -49.52% | -9.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.03% | -10.68% | -0.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | -13.95% | -13.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | -27.63% | -4.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | -40.73% | -0.40% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -10.68% | +10.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.75% | -23.16% | +12.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.11% | 3.71% | -0.60% |
Volatility
IWM vs. PDBC - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.17% compared to Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC) at 4.94%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PDBC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.17% | 4.94% | +2.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.27% | 16.16% | -1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.67% | 18.73% | +0.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.62% | 19.17% | +3.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.09% | 17.79% | +5.30% |
IWM vs. PDBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than PDBC's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWM vs. PDBC - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, less than PDBC's 3.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 1.10% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 3.01% | 3.84% | 4.42% | 4.21% | 13.05% | 50.83% | 0.01% | 1.40% | 1.00% | 3.83% | 6.51% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWM and PDBC have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (7.17%) compared to PDBC (4.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs PDBC's -49.52%.
On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 11.40% vs 7.87% for PDBC. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, PDBC has been the lower-risk option at 4.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 11.40% return vs 7.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for PDBC.
PDBC has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 1.10% for IWM.
IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while PDBC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.58% for PDBC.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.59), 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 IWM and PDBC
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