RUNN vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - RUNN is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Running Oak Capital, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. RUNN is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RUNN returned 8.11%/yr vs 12.37%/yr for CMDT. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

RUNN vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -3.87% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 12.33% return.

RUNN

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -1.71%
• YTD: -3.87%
• 6M: -5.42%
• 1Y: -3.15%
• 3Y*: 8.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CMDT

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: -8.79%
• YTD: 12.33%
• 6M: 11.88%
• 1Y: 22.54%
• 3Y*: 12.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RUNN vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	-3.87%	2.30%	17.16%	11.90%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	12.33%	12.78%	6.93%	6.33%

Correlation

The correlation between RUNN and CMDT is -0.09, 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	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2023	0.00

Return for Risk

RUNN vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 7
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 6
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 6

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 55
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 56
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

RUNN vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) 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.

	RUNN	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.24	1.78	-2.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.26	2.46	-2.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.30	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	1.71	-2.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.66	9.07	-9.73

RUNN vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUNN Sharpe Ratio is -0.24, which is lower than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUNN 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.

Drawdowns

RUNN vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -13.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUNN	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.83%	-13.23%	-3.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-13.23%	+2.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.83%	-13.23%	-3.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.72%	-11.97%	+3.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.62%	-2.80%	-0.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.76%	2.49%	+2.27%

Volatility

RUNN vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 3.94%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 4.24%. This indicates that RUNN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUNN	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.94%	4.24%	-0.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.92%	10.94%	-1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.01%	12.74%	+0.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.80%	12.33%	+1.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.80%	12.33%	+1.47%

RUNN vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

RUNN vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than CMDT's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.69%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.58%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUNN and CMDT in my portfolio?

RUNN and CMDT have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RUNN or CMDT?

CMDT has higher volatility (4.24%) compared to RUNN (3.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs CMDT's -13.23%.

Which ETF is better, RUNN or CMDT?

On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 12.37% vs 8.11% for RUNN. On fees, RUNN is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RUNN or CMDT?

Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 12.37% return vs 8.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUNN or CMDT?

RUNN is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RUNN or CMDT?

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

What is the main difference between RUNN and CMDT?

RUNN is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs -0.24), 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.