Skip to content

CMDY vs PIT

iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF

CMDYANYSE Arca

VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF

PITCCboe

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

CMDY −0.26pt a year

CMDY0.29%PIT0.55%

Avg volume · 30D

CMDY 1.6×the volume

CMDY90.8KPIT55.9K

3Y return · a year

PIT +10.1pt

CMDY+14.9%PIT+25.0%

CMDY vs PIT Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+32.5%CMDY+64.7%PIT

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. CMDY +32.5%. PIT +64.7%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%20%40%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
CMDY 0.29%, better
PIT 0.55%
Fund size
CMDY $743M
PIT $512M
1Y total return
CMDY +32.5%
PIT +64.7%, better
Yield (12M)
CMDY 9.96%, better
PIT 5.58%
Holdings
CMDY 108
PIT 5
Avg volume (30D)
CMDY 90.8K sh, better
PIT 55.9K sh
NAV per share
CMDY $63.21
PIT $84.58
52W range

ETF.net Grade

CMDY: Cost 84, Risk 52, Mission not scored, Tradability 47, Holdings 85, Durability 67. PIT: Cost 61, Risk 44, Mission not scored, Tradability 48, Holdings not scored, Durability 45.
Pillar letters and Scores for CMDY, PIT, with each pillar’s weight
PillarCMDYPIT
Cost30% weightA84HigherB61
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC52HigherC44
Tradability15% weightC47C48Higher
Holdings10% weightA85Not scored
Durability5% weightB67HigherC45

Rank among Broad Commodity Futures funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. CMDY and PIT are both graded against the same 21 Broad Commodity Futures funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Broad Commodity Futures⁠

Category · 21 funds
See all 21 ›

CMDY ranks 2nd and PIT 8th of 21 funds in the Broad Commodity Futures Category.

  1. Rank 1ACERYState Street SPDR Bloomberg Enhanced Roll Yield Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETFScore 77
  2. Rank 2ACMDYiShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETFScore 69
  3. Rank 3ACOMBGraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETFScore 68
  4. Rank 8CCOMDirexion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETFScore 53
  5. Rank 8CPITVanEck Commodity Strategy ETFScore 53
  6. Rank 10CHGERHarbor Commodity All-Weather Strategy ETF (HGER)Score 52

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

CMDYAiShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF

PITCVanEck Commodity Strategy ETF

In short

CMDY Commodities without the worst of the futures math. CMDY tracks the Roll Select version of the Bloomberg commodity index, where contract choice is written into the rules to ease rolling costs, and charges 0.29% to do it.

PIT Most broad commodity funds hand the wheel to an index. PIT is VanEck's active take: a compact book of commodity futures where a manager picks the exposures, priced below the typical fund in its group.

Stated mandate

CMDY The fund seeks to track an index representing a broad range of commodity exposures, using enhanced roll selection on a total-return basis.

PIT The Fund seeks long-term capital appreciation through an actively managed portfolio focused primarily on commodity futures and related commodity instruments.

Why people hold it

  • CMDY The name is the strategy. Enhanced roll selection is baked into the index it tracks, so which futures contract to hold is a rule, not an afterthought.
  • 0.29% a year sits in the low-fee tier of broad commodity funds, next to BCI, CERY and BCD, and well under what the category typically charges.
  • One ticker, a broad basket of roughly 60 futures positions, run on a total-return basis that counts collateral income alongside commodity price moves.
  • Live since 2018 under the iShares roof, and one of the stronger implementations in its broad-basket commodity peer group.
  • PIT Active by design: roughly 30 futures and commodity-linked positions picked by VanEck's team instead of a fixed index recipe, with a stated goal of long-term capital appreciation.
  • 0.55% a year sits below the typical broad commodity futures fund, so the active mandate does not carry an active price tag relative to the group.
  • Exposure runs through exchange-traded commodity futures and commodity-linked instruments rather than bars in a vault, so there is no physical metal or barrel to store.
  • Lands in the upper half of the broad commodity futures basket group on the fundamentals: cost, tradability and structure.

Worth knowing

  • CMDY Moderately traded rather than a volume monster. Spreads can run wider than the mega-cap index funds, which shows up most on large or hurried orders.
  • It is structured as a commodity pool, not a plain stock fund, so the tax paperwork and reporting work differently. Check the details before filing season.
  • Distributions land annually or semiannually, not monthly, and the roll rule addresses futures mechanics only. Commodity prices still swing hard on their own.
  • PIT Commodity futures swing on weather, supply shocks and the dollar, and there are no stocks or bonds in here to soften a drawdown.
  • Index-tracking rivals cost less: BCI at 0.26% and CMDY at 0.29% against 0.55% here. Active management is the thing you are paying the gap for.
  • A December 2022 launch with distributions once or twice a year at most: short history, capital-appreciation mandate, not an income stream.

Full CMDY profile⁠

Full PIT profile⁠

CMDY vs PIT Holdings

How CMDY and PIT differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of CMDY and 0.0% of PIT.

Level by level

  • Holdings0 in both0.0%
  • Countryby domicile89.7%
  • Asset classCommodities100%

Sector

No Sector split for PIT.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in CMDY and PIT, widest gap first
CountryMore in CMDYMore in PIT
United StatesPIT +10.3 points
CanadaCMDY +4.7 points
SingaporeCMDY +1.7 points
AustraliaCMDY +1.4 points
United KingdomCMDY +1.2 points
SwedenCMDY +1.2 points
FinlandCMDY +0.3 points

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • CMDY28.2%
  • PIT100.0%

Securities held

  • CMDY52
  • PIT1

Asset class

CMDY
Commodities
PIT
Commodities

Holdings

  • Only in CMDY52
  • In both0
  • Only in PIT1

Only in CMDY

52 securities, 91.1% of CMDY by weight

  • Treasury Bill26.35%
  • Spire Inc 144A2.29%
  • Procter & Gamble Company (The) 144A2.15%

Only in PIT

1 security, 95.5% of PIT by weight

  • United States Treasury Bill95.50%

Weight gaps

CMDY and PIT share no securities.

All 56 CMDY holdings⁠All 34 PIT holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

CMDY vs PIT Cost

Overpaying PIT vs CMDY

$4,952

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • CMDY 0.29%

    $5,952

  • PIT 0.55%

    $10,904

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • CMDY 0.29%
  • PIT 0.55%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2.5K$5K$7.5K$10K$12.5K051015202530PIT $10,904CMDY $5,952

Year by year

YearCMDYPITOverpaying
10$527$988$461
20$2,044$3,790$1,746
30$5,952$10,904$4,952

Expense ratio

  • 0.29%CMDY, cheaper
  • 0.55%PIT
  • Middle half of Broad Commodity Futures funds
  • Median 0.68%

CMDY 4th cheapest of 21 funds

PIT 8th cheapest of 21 funds

CMDY vs PIT Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Yield (12M)
CMDY 9.96%, better
PIT 5.58%
Payout (12M)
CMDY $6.29
PIT $4.71
Last payment
CMDY $6.29
PIT $4.71
Ex-dividend
CMDY Dec 16, 2025
PIT Dec 22, 2025
Paid on
CMDY Dec 19, 2025
PIT Dec 26, 2025
Frequency
CMDY Annual
PIT Annual

Distribution history

Per share, 2018 to 2026, same scale for both

CMDYAnnual · 8 paymentsAll CMDY payments⁠
One bar per payment. 8 payments from 2018 to 2026 YTD. Dec 18, 2018 $0.76; Dec 16, 2019 $1.00; Dec 14, 2020 $0.07; Dec 13, 2021 $7.96; Dec 13, 2022 $2.17; Dec 20, 2023 $2.40; Dec 17, 2024 $2.01; Dec 16, 2025 $6.29. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5202020232026YTD
PITAnnual · 3 paymentsAll PIT payments⁠
One bar per payment. 3 payments from 2018 to 2026 YTD. Dec 18, 2023 $2.96; Dec 23, 2024 $1.70; Dec 22, 2025 $4.71. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5202020232026YTD

CMDY vs PIT Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
CMDY 13.1%, betterPIT 17.6%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
CMDY 0.79PIT 1.10, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
CMDY −26.6%PIT −17.2%since Dec 2022
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
CMDY 0.90PIT 1.13

Popular comparisons

  • CMDYAvsCERYA

    iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF · State Street SPDR Bloomberg Enhanced Roll Yield Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.29% · 0.28%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PITCvsCERYA

    VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF · State Street SPDR Bloomberg Enhanced Roll Yield Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.55% · 0.28%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • CMDYAvsCOMBA

    iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF · GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.29% · 0.25%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PITCvsCOMBA

    VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF · GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.55% · 0.25%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • CMDYAvsSDMFB

    iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF · Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.29% · 0.21%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PITCvsSDMFB

    VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF · Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.55% · 0.21%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.