PWZ vs. FTGC
PWZ (Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and FTGC (First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PWZ is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA California Long-Term Core Plus Muni, while FTGC is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust. PWZ is passively managed, while FTGC is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, PWZ returned 1.82%/yr vs 7.08%/yr for FTGC. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. PWZ charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FTGC.
Performance
PWZ vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWZ achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 20.51% return. Over the past 10 years, PWZ has underperformed FTGC with an annualized return of 1.82%, while FTGC has yielded a comparatively higher 7.08% annualized return.
PWZ
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 2.13%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 6M
- 2.85%
- 1Y
- 8.60%
- 3Y*
- 3.05%
- 5Y*
- 0.12%
- 10Y*
- 1.82%
FTGC
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- -6.35%
- YTD
- 20.51%
- 6M
- 22.09%
- 1Y
- 27.15%
- 3Y*
- 13.64%
- 5Y*
- 12.88%
- 10Y*
- 7.08%
PWZ vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.70% | 1.26% | 2.16% | 6.55% | -11.35% | 1.94% | 4.90% | 8.72% | 0.32% | 6.82% |
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 20.51% | 14.61% | 9.96% | -5.36% | 17.36% | 27.95% | 2.17% | 6.40% | -12.75% | 2.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWZ and FTGC is -0.22, 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 | -0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2013 | -0.01 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between PWZ and FTGC has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.01 to -0.22, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
PWZ vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank
PWZ
FTGC
PWZ vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.
| PWZ | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.31 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.56 | 2.80 | -0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.25 | 9.24 | 0.00 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PWZ vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWZ drawdown since its inception was -21.49%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWZ and FTGC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWZ | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.49% | -59.47% | +37.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.47% | -9.63% | +6.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.09% | -10.39% | +1.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.56% | -22.64% | +5.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.56% | -35.91% | +18.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.32% | -9.63% | +9.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.53% | -27.35% | +23.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.96% | 2.95% | -1.99% |
Volatility
PWZ vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) is 1.09%, while First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) has a volatility of 3.15%. This indicates that PWZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWZ | FTGC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.09% | 3.15% | -2.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.06% | 13.19% | -10.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.29% | 15.66% | -11.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.25% | 15.85% | -9.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.89% | 14.71% | -8.82% |
PWZ vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison
PWZ has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
PWZ vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison
PWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, less than FTGC's 15.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund | 15.91% | 17.74% | 3.05% | 3.34% | 10.35% | 7.21% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 0.80% | 1.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.57% | 3.41% | 3.28% | 2.84% | 2.49% | 2.28% | 2.34% | 2.51% | 2.53% | 2.48% | 2.86% | 3.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PWZ and FTGC have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FTGC has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to PWZ (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWZ dropped -21.49% vs FTGC's -59.47%.
On 10-year performance, FTGC leads with 7.08% vs 1.82% for PWZ. On fees, PWZ is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, PWZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 7.08% return vs 1.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PWZ is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.
FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 15.91%, compared with 3.57% for PWZ.
PWZ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FTGC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PWZ and 0.95% for FTGC.
PWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.72), 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 PWZ and FTGC
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