LDDR vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LDDR (LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - LDDR is a Target Retirement Date fund actively managed by STONE RIDGE, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. LDDR is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past year, LDDR returned 2.74% vs 21.34% for CMDT. At a correlation of -0.23, they often move in opposite directions. LDDR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

LDDR vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF (LDDR) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDDR achieves a -0.19% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 13.43% return.

LDDR

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: -0.19%
• 6M: -0.15%
• 1Y: 2.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CMDT

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -8.86%
• YTD: 13.43%
• 6M: 13.42%
• 1Y: 21.34%
• 3Y*: 12.77%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LDDR vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LDDR LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF	-0.19%	6.74%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	13.43%	12.34%

Correlation

The correlation between LDDR and CMDT is -0.26, 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	-0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 6, 2025	-0.23

Return for Risk

LDDR vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDDR

LDDR Risk / Return Rank: 25
LDDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
LDDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
LDDR Omega Ratio Rank: 23
LDDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
LDDR Martin Ratio Rank: 24

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 50
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 48
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

LDDR vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF (LDDR) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.

	LDDR	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	1.71	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	2.39	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.29	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.10	1.93	-0.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.97	9.62	-6.65

LDDR vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDDR Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDDR and CMDT, 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

LDDR vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDDR drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum CMDT drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDDR and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LDDR	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.50%	-11.11%	+8.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.50%	-11.11%	+8.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.72%	-11.11%	+9.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.72%	-2.77%	+2.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	2.25%	-1.33%

Volatility

LDDR vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF (LDDR) is 0.93%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 3.26%. This indicates that LDDR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LDDR	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.93%	3.26%	-2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.26%	10.60%	-8.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.15%	12.65%	-9.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.01%	12.24%	-8.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.01%	12.24%	-8.23%

LDDR vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDDR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

LDDR vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

LDDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.67%, more than CMDT's 2.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.67%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
LDDR LifeX 2035 Income Bucket ETF	12.67%	14.63%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LDDR and CMDT in my portfolio?

LDDR and CMDT have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LDDR or CMDT?

CMDT has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to LDDR (0.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LDDR dropped -2.50% vs CMDT's -11.11%.

Which ETF is better, LDDR or CMDT?

On 1-year performance, CMDT leads with 21.34% vs 2.74% for LDDR. On fees, LDDR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, LDDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LDDR or CMDT?

Over the 1-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 21.34% return vs 2.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LDDR or CMDT?

LDDR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LDDR or CMDT?

LDDR has the higher dividend yield at 12.67%, compared with 2.67% for CMDT.

What is the main difference between LDDR and CMDT?

LDDR is categorized as Target Retirement Date, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: STONE RIDGE and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LDDR and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 0.88), 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.