ZAPR vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ZAPR (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ZAPR is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. ZAPR is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past year, ZAPR returned 6.50% vs 21.34% for CMDT. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. ZAPR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR) 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, ZAPR achieves a 3.01% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 13.43% return.

ZAPR

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 3.01%
• 6M: 3.01%
• 1Y: 6.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZAPR Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April	3.01%	5.31%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	13.43%	6.33%

Correlation

The correlation between ZAPR and CMDT is -0.02, 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	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	-0.01

Return for Risk

ZAPR vs. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZAPR

ZAPR Risk / Return Rank: 98
ZAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 99

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 50
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 48
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR) 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.

	ZAPR	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.48	1.71	+2.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.98	2.39	+5.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.13	1.29	+0.84
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	16.26	1.93	+14.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	73.32	9.62	+63.70

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZAPR Sharpe Ratio is 4.48, which is higher than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZAPR 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

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZAPR drawdown since its inception was -1.72%, smaller than the maximum CMDT drawdown of -11.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZAPR and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZAPR	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.72%	-11.11%	+9.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.40%	-11.11%	+10.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-11.11%	+10.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-2.77%	+2.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.09%	2.25%	-2.16%

Volatility

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR) is 0.52%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 3.26%. This indicates that ZAPR 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

	ZAPR	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.52%	3.26%	-2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.11%	10.60%	-9.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.48%	12.65%	-11.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.49%	12.24%	-9.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.49%	12.24%	-9.75%

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZAPR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZAPR vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

ZAPR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.67%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
ZAPR Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZAPR and CMDT in my portfolio?

ZAPR and CMDT have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ZAPR or CMDT?

CMDT has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to ZAPR (0.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZAPR dropped -1.72% vs CMDT's -11.11%.

Which ETF is better, ZAPR or CMDT?

On 1-year performance, CMDT leads with 21.34% vs 6.50% for ZAPR. On fees, CMDT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ZAPR has been the lower-risk option at 0.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZAPR or CMDT?

Over the 1-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 21.34% return vs 6.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZAPR or CMDT?

CMDT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ZAPR.

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

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 0.00% for ZAPR.

What is the main difference between ZAPR and CMDT?

ZAPR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZAPR and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.48 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.