PCLPX vs. FFGTX
Compare and contrast key facts about PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) and Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class M (FFGTX).
PCLPX is an actively managed fund by PIMCO. It was launched on May 28, 2010. FFGTX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Mar 25, 2009.
Performance
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 | 30.92% | 4.45% | 5.92% | 0.24% | 23.04% | 43.50% | -9.12% | 19.39% | -12.15% | 10.53% |
FFGTX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class M | 22.70% | 27.96% | 2.37% | -5.62% | 20.06% | 25.38% | 5.41% | 17.23% | -13.73% | 17.38% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCLPX achieves a 30.92% return, which is significantly higher than FFGTX's 22.70% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with PCLPX having a 12.75% annualized return and FFGTX not far ahead at 13.28%.
PCLPX
- 1D
- 0.81%
- 1M
- 19.05%
- YTD
- 30.92%
- 6M
- 31.70%
- 1Y
- 32.88%
- 3Y*
- 13.71%
- 5Y*
- 17.65%
- 10Y*
- 12.75%
FFGTX
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -1.64%
- YTD
- 22.70%
- 6M
- 30.84%
- 1Y
- 51.60%
- 3Y*
- 17.10%
- 5Y*
- 15.16%
- 10Y*
- 13.28%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCLPX has a 0.92% expense ratio, which is lower than FFGTX's 1.52% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
PCLPX vs. FFGTX — Risk / Return Rank
PCLPX
FFGTX
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - 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 M (FFGTX). 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 | FFGTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.84 | 2.52 | -0.68 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.39 | 3.03 | -0.65 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.48 | -0.14 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.11 | 3.39 | -0.28 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.65 | 17.47 | -8.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PCLPX | FFGTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.84 | 2.52 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 | 0.71 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 | 0.59 | -0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.33 | -0.17 |
Correlation
The correlation between PCLPX and FFGTX is 0.60, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Dividend Comparison
PCLPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than FFGTX's 1.64% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PCLPX PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 | 1.41% | 1.31% | 5.22% | 4.65% | 43.16% | 74.10% | 0.71% | 2.39% | 18.62% | 12.52% | 0.15% | 1.92% |
FFGTX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class M | 1.64% | 2.02% | 1.93% | 1.47% | 1.47% | 2.91% | 1.03% | 2.51% | 1.57% | 0.36% | 1.05% | 2.07% |
Drawdowns
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCLPX drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, which is greater than FFGTX's maximum drawdown of -58.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLPX and FFGTX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCLPX | FFGTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.98% | -58.53% | -8.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.95% | -14.66% | +3.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.53% | -27.31% | +5.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.87% | -48.88% | -2.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.37% | +2.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.90% | -20.56% | -4.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.94% | 2.85% | +1.09% |
Volatility
PCLPX vs. FFGTX - Volatility Comparison
PIMCO CommoditiesPLUS Strategy I2 (PCLPX) has a higher volatility of 10.35% compared to Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class M (FFGTX) at 6.12%. This indicates that PCLPX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFGTX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| PCLPX | FFGTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.35% | 6.12% | +4.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.66% | 13.74% | +0.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.86% | 20.50% | -1.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.23% | 21.55% | -2.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.61% | 22.54% | +18.07% |