MBBA vs. COMB
MBBA (iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF) and COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MBBA is a Mortgage Backed Securities fund actively managed by iShares, while COMB is a Commodities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.41, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.
Performance
MBBA vs. COMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MBBA
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 1.26%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COMB
- 1D
- -1.79%
- 1M
- -11.53%
- YTD
- 12.91%
- 6M
- 11.15%
- 1Y
- 22.86%
- 3Y*
- 10.90%
- 5Y*
- 9.22%
- 10Y*
- —
MBBA vs. COMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MBBA iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF | 1.27% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 3.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between MBBA and COMB is -0.41, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2026 | -0.41 |
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
MBBA vs. COMB — Risk / Return Rank
MBBA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
COMB
MBBA vs. COMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF (MBBA) and GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB). 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.
| MBBA | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.25 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.55 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.61 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MBBA vs. COMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MBBA drawdown since its inception was -2.83%, smaller than the maximum COMB drawdown of -33.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBBA and COMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MBBA | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.83% | -33.50% | +30.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -14.84% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.84% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.63% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | -14.84% | +14.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -12.04% | +10.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.47% | — |
Volatility
MBBA vs. COMB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MBBA | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.91% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 15.35% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.55% | 17.33% | -12.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.55% | 16.71% | -12.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.55% | 15.15% | -10.60% |
MBBA vs. COMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both MBBA and COMB have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
MBBA vs. COMB - Dividend Comparison
MBBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than COMB's 8.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 8.02% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
MBBA iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF | 1.83% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MBBA and COMB have a correlation of -0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MBBA and COMB have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.
COMB has the higher dividend yield at 8.02%, compared with 1.83% for MBBA.
MBBA is categorized as Mortgage Backed Securities, while COMB is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and GraniteShares.
Find the right allocation for MBBA and COMB
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