PCMM vs. PDO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PCMM (BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF) is CLO fund actively managed by BondBloxx, while PDO (Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund) is a stock. Over the past year, PCMM returned 4.76% vs 8.19% for PDO. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

PCMM vs. PDO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) and Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund (PDO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCMM achieves a 2.10% return, which is significantly higher than PDO's -1.49% return.

PCMM

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.94%
• YTD: 2.10%
• 6M: 2.32%
• 1Y: 4.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PDO

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 2.18%
• YTD: -1.49%
• 6M: -1.49%
• 1Y: 8.19%
• 3Y*: 11.86%
• 5Y*: 2.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

PCMM vs. PDO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	2.10%	6.30%	0.37%
PDO Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund	-1.49%	13.96%	-0.02%

Correlation

The correlation between PCMM and PDO is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2024	0.07

Return for Risk

PCMM vs. PDO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCMM

PCMM Risk / Return Rank: 44
PCMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
PCMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
PCMM Omega Ratio Rank: 42
PCMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
PCMM Martin Ratio Rank: 50

PDO

PDO Risk / Return Rank: 63
PDO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
PDO Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
PDO Omega Ratio Rank: 63
PDO Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
PDO Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

PCMM vs. PDO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) and Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund (PDO). 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.

	PCMM	PDO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	0.80	+0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.95	1.15	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.18	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.22	0.74	+1.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.94	2.50	+5.45

PCMM vs. PDO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is higher than the PDO Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCMM and PDO, 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

PCMM vs. PDO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCMM drawdown since its inception was -4.32%, smaller than the maximum PDO drawdown of -36.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCMM and PDO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCMM	PDO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.32%	-36.83%	+32.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.16%	-11.18%	+9.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.55%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-5.32%	+5.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.42%	-14.33%	+13.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.61%	3.29%	-2.68%

Volatility

PCMM vs. PDO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) is 0.83%, while Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund (PDO) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that PCMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PDO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCMM	PDO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.83%	3.93%	-3.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.64%	9.32%	-6.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.51%	10.33%	-6.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.90%	15.80%	-10.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.90%	15.54%	-10.64%

Dividends

PCMM vs. PDO - Dividend Comparison

PCMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.56%, less than PDO's 11.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	6.56%	7.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PDO Pimco Dynamic Income Opportunities Fund	11.92%	11.09%	11.29%	12.54%	19.09%	8.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCMM and PDO in my portfolio?

PCMM and PDO have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCMM or PDO?

PDO has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to PCMM (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCMM dropped -4.32% vs PDO's -36.83%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PCMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.80), 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.