PCLPX vs. FCGCX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PCLPX (PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2) and FCGCX (Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C) are both Commodities funds. Over the past 10 years, PCLPX returned 11.69%/yr vs 12.05%/yr for FCGCX. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCLPX charges 0.92%/yr vs 1.97%/yr for FCGCX.

Performance

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) and Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCLPX achieves a 36.90% return, which is significantly higher than FCGCX's 24.10% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with PCLPX having a 11.69% annualized return and FCGCX not far ahead at 12.05%.

PCLPX

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -3.68%
• YTD: 36.90%
• 6M: 35.89%
• 1Y: 46.36%
• 3Y*: 16.93%
• 5Y*: 15.85%
• 10Y*: 11.69%

FCGCX

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: 24.10%
• 6M: 26.46%
• 1Y: 50.72%
• 3Y*: 18.88%
• 5Y*: 12.55%
• 10Y*: 12.05%

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

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2	36.90%	4.45%	5.92%	0.24%	23.04%	43.50%	-9.12%	19.39%	-12.15%	10.53%
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	24.10%	27.29%	1.90%	-6.06%	19.45%	24.85%	4.96%	16.74%	-14.07%	17.33%

Correlation

The correlation between PCLPX and FCGCX is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2010	0.60

The correlation between PCLPX and FCGCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PCLPX vs. FCGCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCLPX

PCLPX Risk / Return Rank: 75
PCLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
PCLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
PCLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 61
PCLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PCLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

FCGCX

FCGCX Risk / Return Rank: 89
FCGCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FCGCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FCGCX Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FCGCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FCGCX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) and Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX). 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.

	PCLPX	FCGCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.47	3.11	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	3.93	-0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.53	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.95	6.81	+0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.88	24.40	-6.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCLPX Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the FCGCX Sharpe Ratio of 3.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCLPX and FCGCX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCLPX	FCGCX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.47	3.11	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82	0.59	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29	0.54	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.16	0.31	-0.15

Drawdowns

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCLPX drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, which is greater than FCGCX's maximum drawdown of -59.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLPX and FCGCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCLPX	FCGCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.98%	-59.67%	-7.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.87%	-7.45%	+0.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.55%	-19.96%	+6.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.53%	-27.43%	+5.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.87%	-49.31%	-2.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.68%	-1.62%	-3.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.65%	-21.21%	-3.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.66%	2.07%	+0.59%

Volatility

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) has a higher volatility of 6.97% compared to Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) at 4.34%. This indicates that PCLPX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCGCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCLPX	FCGCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.97%	4.34%	+2.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.80%	13.29%	+3.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.43%	16.36%	+3.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.52%	21.38%	-1.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.63%	22.43%	+18.20%

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCLPX has a 0.92% expense ratio, which is lower than FCGCX's 1.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCLPX vs. FCGCX - Dividend Comparison

PCLPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than FCGCX's 1.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	1.19%	1.48%	1.38%	0.80%	1.09%	2.41%	0.59%	1.94%	1.11%	0.36%	0.71%	1.49%
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2	1.35%	1.31%	5.22%	4.65%	43.16%	74.10%	0.71%	2.39%	18.62%	12.52%	0.15%	1.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCLPX and FCGCX in my portfolio?

PCLPX and FCGCX have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCLPX or FCGCX?

PCLPX has higher volatility (6.97%) compared to FCGCX (4.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCLPX dropped -66.98% vs FCGCX's -59.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCGCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.11 vs 2.47), 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.