Which returned more over the last year, COMB or FTGC?

In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COMB returned +40.1% and FTGC +42.1%.

Which is cheaper, COMB or FTGC?

COMB is cheaper, by 0.73 percentage points a year. On $10,000 held for a year that difference is about $73. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Compare their flows Ask about these two funds

COMB vs FTGC: how they differ

COMB and FTGC hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and FTGC returned +42.1% over the year. GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund.

COMB costs 0.73 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 2.0 points; FTGC is far larger, $3.4bn against $161m.

	COMB	FTGC
Expense ratio	0.25%	0.98%
Net assets, as of Oct 8, 2026	$161m	$3.4bn
Total return, 1 year	+40.1%	+42.1%
Holdings in common	0%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 8, 2026.

+40.1%

COMB total return, 1 year

+42.1%

FTGC total return, 1 year

0.25%

COMB expense ratio

0.98%

FTGC expense ratio

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COMB and FTGC hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 8, 2026.

50%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold, largest shared weight first

Holding COMB FTGC

Only in COMB

Only in FTGC

GASOLINE RBOB FUT Dec26 7.38%

BRENT CRUDE FUTR Jan27 6.53%

GOLD 100 OZ FUTR Dec26 6.28%

WTI CRUDE FUTURE Dec26 5.63%

LME ZINC FUTURE Dec26 5.47%

NATURAL GAS FUTR Dec26 5.13%

Low Su Gasoil G Nov26 5.10%

COPPER FUTURE Dec26 5.05%

On the same fields

COMB

GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF

FTGC

First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund

Where it sits Commodity ETF Commodity ETF

Issuer GraniteShares First Trust

What it is Actively managed Actively managed

Total return, 1 year +40.1% +42.1%

S&P 500 over the same days +17.3% +17.3%

Gap to the S&P 500 +22.9 pts +24.9 pts

Expense ratio 0.25% 0.98%

Holdings 0 30

Net assets, as of Oct 8, 2026 $161m $3.4bn

COMB and FTGC on the fields both publish, as of Oct 9, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

COMB in plain words

COMB is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year.

Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +40.1% with distributions reinvested, against +40.2% for its benchmark, the Bloomberg Commodity Total Return Index.

FTGC in plain words

FTGC is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +42.1% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.98% a year.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COMB or FTGC?: In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COMB returned +40.1% and FTGC +42.1%.
Which is cheaper, COMB or FTGC?: COMB is cheaper, by 0.73 percentage points a year. On $10,000 held for a year that difference is about $73. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

COMB vs FAAR BCI vs COMB COMB vs HGER COMB vs DBC FTGC vs PIT FTGC vs NBCM FTGC vs GSG FTGC vs HGER

COMB on its own →FTGC on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

COMB filings on SEC EDGAR ↗COMB prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗GraniteShares page for COMB ↗FTGC filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FTGC prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗First Trust page for FTGC ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, COMB against FTGC, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/comb-vs-ftgc

Open data

Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.