XAGG vs. CMDY
XAGG (Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF) and CMDY (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XAGG is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Eaton Vance, while CMDY is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. XAGG is actively managed, while CMDY is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. XAGG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for CMDY.
Performance
XAGG vs. CMDY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XAGG achieves a 2.48% return, which is significantly lower than CMDY's 20.31% return.
XAGG
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- 6M
- 1.80%
- YTD
- 2.48%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMDY
- 1D
- 1.17%
- 1M
- 2.84%
- 6M
- 15.98%
- YTD
- 20.31%
- 1Y
- 28.27%
- 3Y*
- 12.28%
- 5Y*
- 9.80%
- 10Y*
- —
XAGG vs. CMDY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 2.48% | 1.75% |
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF | 20.31% | 2.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between XAGG and CMDY is -0.19, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
XAGG vs. CMDY — Risk / Return Rank
XAGG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CMDY
XAGG vs. CMDY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF (XAGG) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). 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.
| XAGG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.00 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.61 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XAGG vs. CMDY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XAGG drawdown since its inception was -2.88%, smaller than the maximum CMDY drawdown of -31.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XAGG and CMDY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XAGG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.88% | -31.19% | +28.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -14.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.20% | -7.90% | +7.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.53% | -13.10% | +12.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.28% | — |
Volatility
XAGG vs. CMDY - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XAGG | CMDY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.74% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.40% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.45% | 16.57% | -13.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.45% | 15.83% | -12.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.45% | 14.65% | -11.20% |
XAGG vs. CMDY - Expense Ratio Comparison
XAGG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDY's 0.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
XAGG vs. CMDY - Dividend Comparison
XAGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.45%, less than CMDY's 10.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF | 10.72% | 12.89% | 4.23% | 5.10% | 3.98% | 16.09% | 0.15% | 2.21% | 1.73% |
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 4.45% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XAGG and CMDY have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CMDY is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMDY is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for XAGG.
CMDY has the higher dividend yield at 10.72%, compared with 4.45% for XAGG.
XAGG is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while CMDY is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Eaton Vance and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XAGG and 0.28% for CMDY.
Find the right allocation for XAGG and CMDY
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