PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QVMS vs. CMDT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QVMS vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMS achieves a 20.25% return, which is significantly higher than CMDT's 13.43% return.


QVMS

1D
-0.43%
1M
4.69%
YTD
20.25%
6M
17.76%
1Y
35.14%
3Y*
16.78%
5Y*
10Y*

CMDT

1D
-1.14%
1M
-8.86%
YTD
13.43%
6M
13.42%
1Y
21.34%
3Y*
12.77%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QVMS vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
20.25%5.56%9.50%19.46%
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
13.43%12.78%6.93%5.37%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMS and CMDT is -0.07, 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

-0.07

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2023

0.09

The correlation between QVMS and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

QVMS vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMS
QVMS Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
QVMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QVMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
QVMS Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
QVMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QVMS Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

CMDT
CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QVMS vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.


QVMSCMDTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.29

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.02

1.93

+2.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.65

9.62

+4.03

QVMS vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is comparable to the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMS and CMDT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QVMS vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMS drawdown since its inception was -28.05%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMS and CMDT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QVMSCMDTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.05%

-11.11%

-16.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.78%

-11.11%

+2.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.05%

-11.11%

-16.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-11.11%

+10.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.01%

-2.77%

-6.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

2.25%

+0.33%

Volatility

QVMS vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMS) has a higher volatility of 5.07% compared to PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) at 3.26%. This indicates that QVMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QVMSCMDTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.07%

3.26%

+1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.45%

10.60%

+1.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.83%

12.65%

+5.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.23%

12.24%

+8.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.23%

12.24%

+8.99%

QVMS vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

QVMS vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

QVMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, less than CMDT's 2.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
2.67%3.04%8.80%2.71%0.00%0.00%
QVMS
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 QVM Multi-factor ETF
1.17%1.10%1.53%1.51%1.58%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


QVMS and CMDT have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QVMS has higher volatility (5.07%) compared to CMDT (3.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMS dropped -28.05% vs CMDT's -11.11%.

On 3-year performance, QVMS leads with 16.78% vs 12.77% for CMDT. On fees, QVMS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CMDT has been the lower-risk option at 3.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, QVMS has performed better with a 16.78% return vs 12.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QVMS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 1.17% for QVMS.

QVMS is categorized as Multi-factor, while CMDT is Commodities. QVMS tracks S&P Small Cap 600, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMS and 0.65% for CMDT.

QVMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.71), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QVMS and CMDT

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