PAWZ vs. CMCI

Last updated Jun 17, 2026

PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and CMCI (VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWZ is a Global Equities fund tracking the FactSet Pet Care Index, while CMCI is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Composite Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, PAWZ returned -15.91% vs 20.98% for CMCI. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMCI.

Performance

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAWZ achieves a -11.47% return, which is significantly lower than CMCI's 17.56% return.

PAWZ

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 4.84%
• YTD: -11.47%
• 6M: -11.85%
• 1Y: -15.91%
• 3Y*: -1.31%
• 5Y*: -9.14%
• 10Y*: —

CMCI

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -5.14%
• YTD: 17.56%
• 6M: 20.94%
• 1Y: 20.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	-11.47%	1.21%	3.88%	5.98%
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF	17.56%	7.90%	5.68%	-2.74%

Correlation

The correlation between PAWZ and CMCI 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 23, 2023	0.01

The correlation between PAWZ and CMCI shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PAWZ vs. CMCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAWZ

PAWZ Risk / Return Rank: 2
PAWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
PAWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 0

CMCI

CMCI Risk / Return Rank: 54
CMCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
CMCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
CMCI Omega Ratio Rank: 51
CMCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
CMCI 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.

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI). 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.

	PAWZ	CMCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.97	1.71	-2.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.34	2.37	-3.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.31	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	2.85	-3.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.77	9.40	-11.17

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAWZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.97, which is lower than the CMCI Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAWZ and CMCI, 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

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than CMCI's maximum drawdown of -11.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and CMCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAWZ	CMCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.07%	-11.54%	-38.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.26%	-7.40%	-13.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.07%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.10%	-7.40%	-33.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.64%	-3.57%	-19.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.99%	2.24%	+6.75%

Volatility

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) has a higher volatility of 3.76% compared to VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI) at 3.13%. This indicates that PAWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAWZ	CMCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	3.13%	+0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.44%	10.26%	+1.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.53%	12.33%	+4.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.19%	12.62%	+7.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	12.62%	+9.02%

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CMCI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAWZ vs. CMCI - Dividend Comparison

PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%, less than CMCI's 8.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF	8.41%	9.89%	3.93%	1.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	0.86%	0.81%	0.63%	0.44%	0.54%	0.18%	0.14%	0.35%	0.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAWZ and CMCI in my portfolio?

PAWZ and CMCI 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.

Which is riskier, PAWZ or CMCI?

PAWZ has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to CMCI (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs CMCI's -11.54%.

Which ETF is better, PAWZ or CMCI?

On 1-year performance, CMCI leads with 20.98% vs -15.91% for PAWZ. On fees, PAWZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CMCI has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAWZ or CMCI?

Over the 1-year period, CMCI has performed better with a 20.98% return vs -15.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAWZ or CMCI?

PAWZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMCI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAWZ or CMCI?

CMCI has the higher dividend yield at 8.41%, compared with 0.86% for PAWZ.

What is the main difference between PAWZ and CMCI?

PAWZ is categorized as Global Equities, while CMCI is Commodities. PAWZ tracks FactSet Pet Care Index, while CMCI tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Composite Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.65% for CMCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs -0.97), 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.