PDBA vs. CANE
PDBA (Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) and CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) are both Agricultural Commodities funds. PDBA is actively managed, while CANE is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PDBA returned 13.50%/yr vs -10.43%/yr for CANE. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PDBA charges 0.59%/yr vs 1.88%/yr for CANE.
Performance
PDBA vs. CANE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PDBA achieves a 5.38% return, which is significantly higher than CANE's -0.77% return.
PDBA
- 1D
- -0.89%
- 1M
- -4.99%
- YTD
- 5.38%
- 6M
- 5.65%
- 1Y
- 3.79%
- 3Y*
- 13.50%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANE
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- -5.56%
- YTD
- -0.77%
- 6M
- 0.83%
- 1Y
- -14.28%
- 3Y*
- -10.43%
- 5Y*
- 2.90%
- 10Y*
- -2.23%
PDBA vs. CANE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PDBA Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 5.38% | -0.76% | 34.16% | 7.83% | -1.60% |
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | -0.77% | -14.65% | -7.79% | 30.06% | 6.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between PDBA and CANE is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2022 | 0.38 |
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
PDBA vs. CANE — Risk / Return Rank
PDBA
CANE
PDBA vs. CANE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBA) and Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE). 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.
| PDBA | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 0.90 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.47 | -0.72 | +1.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.92 | -1.18 | +2.10 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PDBA | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 | -0.69 | +1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.10 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | -0.26 | +1.10 |
Drawdowns
PDBA vs. CANE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PDBA drawdown since its inception was -12.45%, smaller than the maximum CANE drawdown of -81.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PDBA and CANE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PDBA | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.45% | -81.30% | +68.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.05% | -19.89% | +11.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.45% | -41.73% | +29.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.73% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -67.29% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.47% | -63.21% | +56.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.79% | -56.50% | +52.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.14% | 12.35% | -8.21% |
Volatility
PDBA vs. CANE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBA) is 4.05%, while Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) has a volatility of 6.85%. This indicates that PDBA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PDBA | CANE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.05% | 6.85% | -2.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.51% | 15.81% | -9.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.77% | 20.69% | -9.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.29% | 21.07% | -7.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.29% | 21.72% | -8.43% |
PDBA vs. CANE - Expense Ratio Comparison
PDBA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CANE's 1.88% expense ratio.
Dividends
PDBA vs. CANE - Dividend Comparison
PDBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.15%, while CANE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PDBA Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 3.15% | 3.32% | 13.01% | 6.82% | 0.74% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PDBA and CANE have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANE has higher volatility (6.85%) compared to PDBA (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PDBA dropped -12.45% vs CANE's -81.30%.
On 3-year performance, PDBA leads with 13.50% vs -10.43% for CANE. On fees, PDBA is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, PDBA has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, PDBA has performed better with a 13.50% return vs -10.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PDBA is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.
PDBA has the higher dividend yield at 3.15%, compared with 0.00% for CANE.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Teucrium. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for PDBA and 1.88% for CANE.
PDBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.35 vs -0.69), 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 PDBA and CANE
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