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

Performance

XLV vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) 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, XLV achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 13.43% return.


XLV

1D
1.41%
1M
1.98%
YTD
-0.85%
6M
-0.97%
1Y
17.16%
3Y*
6.63%
5Y*
5.69%
10Y*
10.01%

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)

XLV vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
XLV
State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
-0.85%14.50%2.47%4.31%
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
13.43%12.78%6.93%5.37%

Correlation

The correlation between XLV and CMDT 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

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

-0.09

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

-0.08

The correlation between XLV and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.08 (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

XLV vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLV
XLV Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
XLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLV Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
XLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLV Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

XLV vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) 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.


XLVCMDTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.29

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.65

1.93

-0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.89

9.62

-5.73

XLV vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is lower than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLV 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

XLV vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLV drawdown since its inception was -39.17%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLV and CMDT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLVCMDTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.17%

-11.11%

-28.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.47%

-11.11%

+0.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.11%

-11.11%

-6.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.20%

-11.11%

+6.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.12%

-2.77%

-4.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.42%

2.25%

+2.17%

Volatility

XLV vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) has a higher volatility of 5.27% compared to PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) at 3.26%. This indicates that XLV'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


XLVCMDTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.27%

3.26%

+2.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.68%

10.60%

+0.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.09%

12.65%

+2.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.77%

12.24%

+2.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.57%

12.24%

+4.33%

XLV vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLV has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

XLV vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

XLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, less than CMDT's 2.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
2.67%3.04%8.80%2.71%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XLV
State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.66%1.60%1.67%1.59%1.47%1.33%1.49%2.17%1.57%1.47%1.60%1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


XLV and CMDT 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.

XLV has higher volatility (5.27%) compared to CMDT (3.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLV dropped -39.17% vs CMDT's -11.11%.

On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 12.77% vs 6.63% for XLV. On fees, XLV is cheaper at 0.08% 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, CMDT has performed better with a 12.77% return vs 6.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLV is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 1.66% for XLV.

XLV is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while CMDT is Commodities. XLV tracks Health Care Select Sector Index, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLV and 0.65% for CMDT.

CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.14), 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 XLV 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