PAWZ vs. CMDT
PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWZ is a Global Equities fund tracking the FactSet Pet Care Index, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAWZ returned -1.31%/yr vs 13.07%/yr for CMDT. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.
Performance
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PAWZ achieves a -11.47% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 16.47% return.
PAWZ
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 4.84%
- YTD
- -11.47%
- 6M
- -11.85%
- 1Y
- -15.91%
- 3Y*
- -1.31%
- 5Y*
- -9.14%
- 10Y*
- —
CMDT
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -7.59%
- YTD
- 16.47%
- 6M
- 19.21%
- 1Y
- 23.48%
- 3Y*
- 13.07%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF | -11.47% | 1.21% | 3.88% | 2.05% |
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 16.47% | 12.78% | 6.93% | 5.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between PAWZ and CMDT is -0.16, 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 | -0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2023 | 0.03 |
The correlation between PAWZ and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.03 (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
PAWZ vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank
PAWZ
CMDT
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) 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.
| PAWZ | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.85 | 1.32 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.75 | 2.70 | -3.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.77 | 11.41 | -13.18 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -9.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and CMDT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PAWZ | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.07% | -9.69% | -40.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.26% | -8.73% | -12.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.12% | -9.69% | -13.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -41.10% | -8.73% | -32.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.64% | -2.73% | -19.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.99% | 2.06% | +6.93% |
Volatility
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) has a higher volatility of 3.76% compared to PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) at 3.52%. This indicates that PAWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PAWZ | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.76% | 3.52% | +0.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.44% | 10.56% | +0.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.53% | 12.59% | +3.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.19% | 12.24% | +7.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.64% | 12.24% | +9.40% |
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison
PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
PAWZ vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison
PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%, less than CMDT's 2.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.60% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% | 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
PAWZ and CMDT have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PAWZ has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to CMDT (3.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs CMDT's -9.69%.
On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 13.07% vs -1.31% for PAWZ. On fees, PAWZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CMDT has been the lower-risk option at 3.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 13.07% return vs -1.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PAWZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.
CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.86% for PAWZ.
PAWZ is categorized as Global Equities, while CMDT is Commodities. PAWZ tracks FactSet Pet Care Index, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.65% for CMDT.
CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 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.
Find the right allocation for PAWZ and CMDT
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