Which returned more over the last year, PDBC or PIT?

In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, PDBC returned +51.9% and PIT +64.3%.

Which is cheaper, PDBC or PIT?

PIT is cheaper, by 0.04 percentage points a year. On $10,000 held for a year that difference is about $4. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

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

PDBC vs PIT: how they differ

PDBC and PIT hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and PIT returned +64.3% over the year. Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF.

PIT costs 0.04 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 12.4 points; PDBC is far larger, $7.9bn against $260m.

	PDBC	PIT
Expense ratio	0.59%	0.55%
Net assets, PDBC as of Oct 8, 2026 and PIT as of Jun 30, 2026	$7.9bn	$260m
Total return, 1 year	+51.9%	+64.3%
Holdings in common	0%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 8, 2026.

+51.9%

PDBC total return, 1 year

+64.3%

PIT total return, 1 year

0.59%

PDBC expense ratio

0.55%

PIT expense ratio

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, PDBC and PIT 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 Oct 8, 2026.

50%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold, largest shared weight first

Holding PDBC PIT

Only in PDBC

POWERSHARES CAYMAN FUND 18.02%

Only in PIT

Other 4.43%

Other 2.96%

Other 2.83%

Brent Crude Futr Dec26 0.00%

Brent Crude Futr Feb27 0.00%

Cattle Feeder Fut Nov26 0.00%

Cocoa Future Dec26 0.00%

Coffee 'C' Future Dec26 0.00%

On the same fields

PDBC

Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF

PIT

VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF

Where it sits Commodity ETF Commodity ETF

Issuer Invesco VanEck

What it is Actively managed Actively managed

Total return, 1 year +51.9% +64.3%

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

Gap to the S&P 500 +34.6 pts +47.1 pts

Expense ratio 0.59% 0.55%

Holdings 1 32

Net assets, PDBC as of Oct 8, 2026 and PIT as of Jun 30, 2026 $7.9bn $260m

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

PDBC in plain words

PDBC is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +51.9% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% a year.

PIT in plain words

PIT is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +64.3% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.55% a year.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, PDBC or PIT?: In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, PDBC returned +51.9% and PIT +64.3%.
Which is cheaper, PDBC or PIT?: PIT is cheaper, by 0.04 percentage points a year. On $10,000 held for a year that difference is about $4. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

COMB vs PDBC CERY vs PDBC FAAR vs PDBC NBCM vs PDBC COMB vs PIT HGER vs PIT BCI vs PIT FTGC vs PIT

PDBC on its own →PIT on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

PDBC filings on SEC EDGAR ↗PDBC prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Invesco page for PDBC ↗PIT filings on SEC EDGAR ↗PIT prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗VanEck website ↗

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, PDBC against PIT, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/pdbc-vs-pit

Open data

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