What Moves Like COM

Direxion Auspice Broad Commodity Strategy ETF Fund · NYSE Arca

The tradable tickers whose daily moves track COM most closely over the past year, filtered to risk comparable with COM's own.

Closest match

BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF — 0.856 correlation over the past year, and 42% choppier than COM.

About COM

Annualised volatility 10.2%
Beta vs SPY 0.04
Market correlation 0.049
Traded per day $3.3M
252 sessions to 2026-09-10 · COM volatility 10.2% annualised · $3.3M a day
Ticker 1-year correlation 3-year Volatility vs COM Risk What it is
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF
0.856
0.815 1.42× 42% choppier Fund
FTGC First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
0.849
0.815 1.58× 58% choppier Fund
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
0.756
0.764 1.32× 32% choppier Fund
RLY State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
0.673
0.610 1.04× similar Fund
LALT First Trust Multi-Strategy Alternative ETF
0.664
0.628 0.68× 32% calmer Fund
RAAX VanEck Real Assets ETF
0.603
0.620 1.48× 48% choppier Fund
PDBA Invesco Agriculture Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF
0.564
0.290 1.08× similar Fund
GUNR Northern Trust Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources ETF
0.556
0.546 1.59× 59% choppier Fund
DBA Invesco DB Agriculture Fund
0.544
0.298 1.09× similar Fund
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
0.505
0.427 1.26× 26% choppier Fund
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF
0.490
0.508 1.56× 56% choppier Fund
KMLM KraneShares Mount Lucas Managed Futures Index Strategy ETF
0.461
0.305 1.23× 23% choppier Fund
SOYB Teucrium Soybean Fund ETV
0.439
0.329 1.34× 34% choppier Fund
FMF First Trust Managed Futures Strategy Fund
0.399
0.329 0.94× similar Fund

Showing 14 of 14 tickers that qualified. Correlation is of daily returns; 1.000 would mean moving in lockstep, 0.000 no relationship at all.

What this is for

Three questions, one number behind all of them.

How to read the two correlation columns

The one-year figure is what the relationship looks like now. The three-year figure is what it has looked like over a longer stretch. Comparing them is the point: when they agree, the relationship is structural and likely to hold. When the one-year number is far below the three-year one, something has changed — a shift in business mix, an index reconstitution, a sector that has stopped moving together — and the recent figure is the one to trust less, not more.

Correlation measures whether two things move together, not whether they move by the same amount. That is why the volatility column is there. Two tickers can correlate at 0.99 while one swings half again as hard, and swapping one for the other would quietly change how much risk you are carrying.

What was deliberately left out

Ranking purely by correlation produces answers that are mathematically perfect and practically useless. The closest matches to AAPL by raw correlation are leveraged AAPL funds at 0.999 — correct, and not replacements for anything. Four filters run before a ticker is allowed to appear:

Where all of that leaves a ticker with no close match, the page says so. A stock with no substitute is a real and useful finding, and inventing a loose one to fill the table would be worse than an empty answer.

Limits, stated up front

Where the numbers come from

Correlations are computed in-house from a daily price history and rebuilt every night. What gets published is the derived statistic — a correlation coefficient, a volatility ratio, an observation count — and nothing from which a price or return series could be reconstructed. The rest of the Markets section is on the Markets overview, including futures positioning extremes and SEC Form 4 insider transactions.