TMDV vs. COMB
TMDV (ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF) and COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMDV is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 3000 Dividend Elite Index, while COMB is a Commodities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. TMDV is passively managed, while COMB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMDV returned 4.22%/yr vs 9.83%/yr for COMB. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMDV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for COMB.
Performance
TMDV vs. COMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMDV achieves a 11.50% return, which is significantly lower than COMB's 17.53% return.
TMDV
- 1D
- 1.04%
- 1M
- 2.39%
- 6M
- 8.05%
- YTD
- 11.50%
- 1Y
- 11.21%
- 3Y*
- 6.24%
- 5Y*
- 4.22%
- 10Y*
- —
COMB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -1.59%
- 6M
- 14.82%
- YTD
- 17.53%
- 1Y
- 25.91%
- 3Y*
- 11.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.83%
- 10Y*
- —
TMDV vs. COMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF | 11.50% | 2.91% | 2.64% | 2.25% | -5.10% | 23.45% | 4.82% | 2.63% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 17.53% | 15.12% | 5.24% | -7.75% | 14.56% | 26.34% | -2.95% | 1.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMDV and COMB is -0.16, 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 | -0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2019 | 0.17 |
The correlation between TMDV and COMB shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.17 (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
TMDV vs. COMB — Risk / Return Rank
TMDV
COMB
TMDV vs. COMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) and GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB). 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.
| TMDV | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.28 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.05 | 1.82 | -0.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.53 | 6.14 | -3.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMDV vs. COMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMDV drawdown since its inception was -33.42%, roughly equal to the maximum COMB drawdown of -33.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMDV and COMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMDV | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.42% | -33.50% | +0.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.82% | -14.84% | +5.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.02% | -14.84% | -1.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.11% | -26.63% | +9.52% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.48% | -11.35% | +9.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.38% | -12.05% | +6.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.08% | 4.40% | -0.32% |
Volatility
TMDV vs. COMB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) is 3.95%, while GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) has a volatility of 4.24%. This indicates that TMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMDV | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.95% | 4.24% | -0.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.04% | 15.09% | -6.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.25% | 17.38% | -5.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.45% | 16.69% | -2.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.58% | 15.15% | +3.43% |
TMDV vs. COMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMDV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than COMB's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMDV vs. COMB - Dividend Comparison
TMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, less than COMB's 7.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 7.70% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF | 2.52% | 2.65% | 2.70% | 2.45% | 2.46% | 2.14% | 2.28% | 0.16% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMDV and COMB have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COMB has higher volatility (4.24%) compared to TMDV (3.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMDV dropped -33.42% vs COMB's -33.50%.
On 5-year performance, COMB leads with 9.83% vs 4.22% for TMDV. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, TMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, COMB has performed better with a 9.83% return vs 4.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for TMDV.
COMB has the higher dividend yield at 7.70%, compared with 2.52% for TMDV.
TMDV is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while COMB is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for TMDV and 0.25% for COMB.
COMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 0.84), 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 TMDV and COMB
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