MRCP vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 20, 2026

MRCP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - MRCP is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. MRCP is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past year, MRCP returned 17.90% vs 20.78% for CMDT. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MRCP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

MRCP vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) 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, MRCP achieves a 7.21% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 14.74% return.

MRCP

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 0.98%
• YTD: 7.21%
• 6M: 7.63%
• 1Y: 17.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CMDT

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: -7.81%
• YTD: 14.74%
• 6M: 15.38%
• 1Y: 20.78%
• 3Y*: 13.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MRCP vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MRCP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March	7.21%	14.13%	11.90%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	14.74%	12.78%	5.23%

Correlation

The correlation between MRCP and CMDT 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2024	0.05

The correlation between MRCP and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MRCP vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MRCP

MRCP Risk / Return Rank: 88
MRCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
MRCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
MRCP Omega Ratio Rank: 92
MRCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MRCP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 48
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

MRCP vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) 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.

	MRCP	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	1.66	+1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.11	2.32	+1.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	1.28	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.70	2.07	+1.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.83	9.74	+11.09

MRCP vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MRCP Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MRCP 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

MRCP vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MRCP drawdown since its inception was -10.73%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -10.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MRCP and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MRCP	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.73%	-10.09%	-0.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.81%	-10.09%	+5.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-10.09%	+9.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.77%	-2.76%	+1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.85%	2.28%	-1.43%

Volatility

MRCP vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) is 2.09%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 3.18%. This indicates that MRCP 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

	MRCP	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.09%	3.18%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.25%	10.52%	-5.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.33%	12.62%	-6.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.26%	12.23%	-2.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.26%	12.23%	-2.97%

MRCP vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MRCP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

MRCP vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

MRCP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.64%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.64%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
MRCP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MRCP and CMDT in my portfolio?

MRCP and CMDT 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, MRCP or CMDT?

CMDT has higher volatility (3.18%) compared to MRCP (2.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MRCP dropped -10.73% vs CMDT's -10.09%.

Which ETF is better, MRCP or CMDT?

On 1-year performance, CMDT leads with 20.78% vs 17.90% for MRCP. On fees, MRCP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, MRCP has been the lower-risk option at 2.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MRCP or CMDT?

Over the 1-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 20.78% return vs 17.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MRCP or CMDT?

MRCP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

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

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.64%, compared with 0.00% for MRCP.

What is the main difference between MRCP and CMDT?

MRCP is categorized as Options Trading, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MRCP and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MRCP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 1.66), 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.