GSG vs COMT ETF comparison

INVEST & COMPOUND · ETF RESEARCHCommodity ETFs · Comparison · Reviewed November 9, 2026
Invest & Compound · ETF ResearchData: Issuer fund pages, Sep 30 to Nov 9, 2026

GSG vs COMT

Close cousins in the commodity market

GSG holds one S&P GSCI futures contract plus Treasury bills, and COMT holds S&P GSCI futures chosen for the best roll yield, plus cash and short-term notes. The two funds follow different indexes. The S&P GSCI Total Return Index weights commodities by world production, so oil and gas make up well over half of the fund.

The S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index follows the S&P GSCI but chooses which contract month to hold using roll yield, so it holds the GSCI mix with a different roll rule. GSG charges 0.75% and COMT charges 0.48%. This page lines up what each fund holds by commodity, how much they overlap, what each paid and how each performed, with the date next to every number.

GSGiShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust
Energy51.8%Agriculture17.0%Industrial metals12.1%Livestock11.2%Precious metals7.9%
HoldsFutures on 24 commodities
Ten largest commodities75.4%
Expense ratio0.75%
Net assets$961.7M
PaysNot captured
Launched2006
COMTiShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF
Energy56.0%Agriculture14.0%Industrial metals12.7%Precious metals8.7%Livestock8.6%
HoldsFutures on 24 commodities
Ten largest commodities80.6%
Expense ratio0.48%
Net assets$1.29B
PaysAnnual
Launched2014
!
GSG and COMT each have exposure to 24 commodities. 92.5% of the weight is shared by commodity in the fund holdings (Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026).
0.27%Expense ratio gap: GSG 0.75%, COMT 0.48%
92.5%Overlap by commodity (issuer holdings, Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026)
75.4% / 80.6%Ten largest commodities, GSG / COMT
3 – 1Return windows led, GSG – COMT
GSG: BlackRock (iShares) fund pages (see Documents and sources). COMT: BlackRock (iShares) fund pages (see Documents and sources). Educational, not advice.
Quick answerUpdated November 9, 2026

GSG vs COMT, the short answer

GSG and COMT differ in what they hold and what they charge. The two funds follow different indexes. The S&P GSCI Total Return Index weights commodities by world production, so oil and gas make up well over half of the fund. The S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index follows the S&P GSCI but chooses which contract month to hold using roll yield, so it holds the GSCI mix with a different roll rule.

Expense ratios are 0.75% and 0.48%. NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 55.21% vs 48.38%; 3 years 16.40% vs 14.56%; 5 years 16.09% vs 13.55%; 10 years 9.16% vs 9.63%. Neither is better for everyone; the choice turns on cost, tax form (K-1 or 1099), and what you already own.

CostCOMT costs less: 0.48% vs 0.75%$75 a year per $10,000 vs $48
Holdings24 commodities eachTen largest 75.4% vs 80.6%
Overlap92.5% of the exposure is sharedby commodity, issuer holdings, Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026
Track recordSee the returns section.1 year 55.21% vs 48.38% (1 year)
Figures from the issuer pages named in the data room, with dates. Educational, not advice.
OverlapTop-ten lists · weights as of the dates shown

GSG vs COMT overlap, if you own both

92.5%of the exposure shared by commodity (Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026) · 9 shared top-ten commodities

GSG · ten largest holdings

As of Jan 2026 index weights
  1. 1Brent crude CO18.23%Both
  2. 2WTI crude CL17.79%Both
  3. 3Gold GC7.24%Both
  4. 4Copper HG5.47%Both
  5. 5Gasoil QS5.22%Both
  6. 6Live cattle LC5.20%Both
  7. 7Corn C4.67%Both
  8. 8Aluminum LA4.28%Both
  9. 9Heating oil HO3.69%Both
  10. 10Natural gas NG3.57%Only here

Ten largest total 75.4%

COMT · ten largest holdings

As of Nov 9, 2026
  1. 1Brent crude CO19.07%Both
  2. 2WTI crude CL18.07%Both
  3. 3Gold GC7.92%Both
  4. 4Gasoil QS7.90%Both
  5. 5Copper HG6.47%Both
  6. 6Heating oil HO5.38%Both
  7. 7Live cattle LC4.47%Both
  8. 8Aluminum LA4.00%Both
  9. 9Corn C3.98%Both
  10. 10Gasoline XB3.38%Only here

Ten largest total 80.6%

Shared by both · 9 commodities

CommodityGSG weightCOMT weightGap
Brent crude CO18.23%19.07%-0.84 pts
WTI crude CL17.79%18.07%-0.28 pts
Gold GC7.24%7.92%-0.68 pts
Copper HG5.47%6.47%-1.00 pts
Gasoil QS5.22%7.90%-2.68 pts
Live cattle LC5.20%4.47%+0.73 pts
Corn C4.67%3.98%+0.69 pts
Aluminum LA4.28%4.00%+0.28 pts
Heating oil HO3.69%5.38%-1.69 pts

Only in GSG’s top ten: Natural gas. Only in COMT’s top ten: Gasoline.

In GSG’s top ten
In COMT’s top ten
92.5%
of the exposure shared by commodity (Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026) · 9 shared top-ten commodities
Biggest sector gaps: energy is 51.8% of GSG but 56.0% of COMT; agriculture is 17.0% of GSG but 14.0% of COMT

The twist

Overlap (commodity)
92.5%
Sector overlap (this page)
94.4%
Top-ten weight, GSG
75.4%
Top-ten weight, COMT
80.6%

92.5% of the exposure sits in commodities both funds hold (matched by commodity, issuer holdings dated Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026), and 9 commodities appear in both top-ten lists. Holding both adds almost no diversification: you are paying for two wrappers around nearly the same basket of commodities.

Top-ten lists: GSG Jan 2026 index weights, COMT Nov 9, 2026. Sector tables: GSG Jan 2026 index weights, COMT Nov 9, 2026. Overlap: sum of the smaller weight of each commodity held by both funds, using each issuer’s published holdings or exposure (Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026); the dates differ for some pairs, so treat it as an estimate. Weights are shares of each fund’s futures exposure by underlying commodity, so Treasury bills, cash and collateral are excluded. GSG holds a single S&P GSCI future, so iShares publishes no commodity weights; the weights used are the S&P GSCI reference weights for 2026 published by S&P Dow Jones Indices (effective Jan 8, 2026). COMT weights are each commodity’s share of futures notional value in the iShares holdings file of Nov 9, 2026. Not advice.
GoalsCharacteristics, not recommendations

GSG vs COMT, one goal, which fund?

FundYour goalWhyThe evidence
COMTLower costLower expense ratioCOMT 0.48% vs GSG 0.75% ($48 vs $75 a year per $10,000)
GSGA flatter top tenLess weight in the largest commoditiesTen largest: GSG 75.4% vs COMT 80.6% (Jan 2026 index weights vs Nov 9, 2026 dates)
COMTHigher 10 years returnLed over 10 yearsGSG 9.16% vs COMT 9.63% annualized, NAV total return (both to Sep 30, 2026)
NEITHERCommodity exposureBoth hold commodity futuresBoth hold futures on oil, metals and farm products and both rise and fall with commodity prices
Fund figures from the issuers named in the data room. Examples, not recommendations.
HoldingsFive largest · full top-ten tables in the data room

GSG vs COMT, where the money goes

GSG · BlackRock (iShares), Jan 2026 index weights

COMT · BlackRock (iShares), Nov 9, 2026

Concentration: GSG ten largest commodities total 75.4% and COMT total 80.6%.
Top ten as listed by each issuer on the dates shown. Weights move with prices. Not advice.
ReturnsAnnualized total returns, matched dates

GSG vs COMT returns compared over 1, 3, 5 and 10 years

+55.21%GSG 1-year NAV total return to Sep 30, 2026
+48.38%COMT 1-year total return to Sep 30, 2026
9.16% vs 9.63%10 years annualized NAV total return, GSG vs COMT (both to Sep 30, 2026)
1 year 55.21% vs 48.38%; 3 years 16.40% vs 14.56%; 5 years 16.09% vs 13.55%; 10 years 9.16% vs 9.63%. Differences reflect what each fund holds and, to a lesser degree, fees.
Matched dates: GSG led 3 of 4 windows and COMT led 1. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
FeesAs stated by each issuer

GSG vs COMT, what each fund costs a year

$75GSG, per $10,000 · 0.75%
$48COMT, per $10,000 · 0.48%
The fees are 0.75% and 0.48%, so the calculator below shows a difference of $27.00 a year per $10,000.
GSG net expense ratio 0.75% (issuer; sponsor fee 0.75%). COMT net expense ratio 0.48% (issuer; gross 0.49%, net 0.48% after a 0.01% waiver). Illustrative arithmetic, not a forecast.

The data room

Every figure behind the GSG vs COMT cards above, with its source, date and evidence grade. Open the issuer documents before relying on any number.

GSG vs COMT key facts

Evidence grade: Issuer issuer page · Mixed issuer plus provider · 3rd party
MetricGSGCOMTGrade and source

Portfolio characteristics

MetricGSGCOMTGrade and source

Net assets are dated Nov 9, 2026 for both funds (GSG $961.7M; COMT $1.29B). Figures that the issuers do not publish, such as beta, standard deviation and 52-week range, are left as Not captured rather than estimated.

GSG vs COMT holdings and top ten

Click a commodity tile · GSG: BlackRock (iShares), Jan 2026 index weights · COMT: BlackRock (iShares), Nov 9, 2026
EnergyAgriculturePrecious metalsIndustrial metalsLivestock
Select a tile
Tile area is proportional to weight.
GSG
#CommodityWeight
COMT
#CommodityWeight

Top ten sums: GSG 75.4% · COMT 80.6%. 9 shared top-ten commodities. Weights change.

GSG vs COMT sector exposure

GSG: Jan 2026 index weights · COMT: Nov 9, 2026
GSG
COMT
Implication. GSG is led by energy 51.8%, agriculture 17.0%, industrial metals 12.1%. COMT is led by energy 56.0%, agriculture 14.0%, industrial metals 12.7%. Livestock is shown as its own group here.

The sector mirror

GSGCOMT
Implication. Sector gaps: energy is 51.8% of GSG and 56.0% of COMT; agriculture is 17.0% and 14.0%; precious metals 7.9% and 8.7% (Jan 2026 index weights vs Nov 9, 2026). Weights are shares of futures exposure, excluding collateral.

Same funds, different lenses

Implication. Energy, farm products, industrial metals, precious metals and livestock are the five groups used for every commodity fund on this site, so the funds compare on the same labels.

Contracts and collateral

Both funds hold futures contracts, not physical commodities. GSG lists 24 commodities and COMT lists 24. Each contract expires and is replaced (rolled) before it ends, and the cash backing the contracts sits in Treasury bills, money market funds and similar holdings. That collateral earns interest and is not counted in the commodity weights here.

What you actually own

IndexGSG tracks the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. COMT uses the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index as its benchmark.GSG · COMT
CommoditiesGSG and COMT each hold exposure to 24 commodities across energy, farm products and metals.Top ten 75.4% vs 80.6%
StructureBoth hold futures, collateral and cash rather than physical commodities. GSG issues a Schedule K-1 and COMT issues a 1099.See prospectuses
ManagementGSG follows its index rules. COMT follows its index rules.Passive vs active

GSG vs COMT performance

Matched dates, both to Sep 30, 2026; issuer NAV rows dated separately

All rows come from the issuer pages and are dated Sep 30, 2026 for both funds, so they compare like for like. NAV returns include fees; market price and benchmark returns are shown beside them where the issuer published them, and gaps are marked Not captured. “Since inception” starts in different years (GSG 2006, COMT 2014). Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Latest returns. Year to date (NAV total return, issuer, dates differ): GSG +49.65% (to Nov 6, 2026), COMT +44.63% (to Nov 6, 2026).

Growth of a hypothetical $10,000 · NAV total return, both to Sep 30, 2026

Both funds derived from issuer NAV total returns on matched dates (compounded). Distributions reinvested; fund expenses are already in NAV. Illustration, not a forecast.

GSG vs COMT yield, dividends and dividend growth

Yield and distribution facts
Yield definitions
MeasureGSGCOMT
30-day SEC yieldNot reportedNot reported
Trailing 12-monthNot capturedNot captured
Paid, last 12 monthsNot capturedNot captured
FrequencyNot capturedAnnual

Distribution frequency: GSG not captured, COMT annual. Per-share payouts differ because share prices differ, so compare yields rather than dollars. Payouts depend on Treasury interest earned on collateral and on how each fund is structured, and some payouts are classed as return of capital. Payouts captured: GSG 0, COMT 0; gaps are marked Not captured. See what is dividend yield and yield vs total return.

GSG vs COMT concentration and overlap

Ten largest positions · shared holdings
9Shared top-ten commodities
92.5%Overlap · by commodity
54.0% / 59.4%Top five, GSG / COMT
19.1%Largest single commodity

Rank by rank, the ten largest commodities of each fund, as a share of futures exposure. Top five: GSG 54.0%, COMT 59.4%. Top ten: GSG 75.4%, COMT 80.6%.

Implication. The lists share 9 commodities, so owning both repeats some of the same bets. Largest commodity: GSG Brent crude (18.23%), COMT Brent crude (19.07%).

GSG vs COMT trading and liquidity

Issuer fund pages · Nov 9, 2026
$961.7M / $1.29BNet assets, GSG / COMT (Nov 9, 2026)
Not captured / Not capturedShares outstanding, GSG / COMT
0.03% / 0.25%Median bid/ask spread, GSG / COMT
NYSE Arca / NASDAQExchange listing, GSG / COMT

The issuers report bid/ask spreads of 0.03% for GSG and 0.25% for COMT (measures differ by issuer; see each fund page). A spread of 0.05% is about $50 between the buy and sell price on $100,000, so check the live quote before you trade.

Commodity prices can swing sharply when oil or metals move, so spreads can widen on volatile days. Use limit orders for large trades and avoid the first and last minutes of the session. See creation, redemption and trading for how NAV, premiums and spreads arise.

GSG vs COMT expense ratio and fees in dollars

As stated by each issuer
BalanceGSG (0.75%)COMT (0.48%)Gap per year
$10,000$75$48$27
$50,000$375$240$135
$100,000$750$480$270

Expense ratio is taken from fund assets, not billed. Net expense ratios are shown (GSG: sponsor fee 0.75%; COMT: gross 0.49%, net 0.48% after a 0.01% waiver). Fees exclude the bid/ask spread, any premium or discount to NAV, brokerage commissions and taxes.

GSG vs COMT, how each fund gets its commodity exposure

Index approach, in plain language

GSG · S&P GSCI Total Return Index

GSG tracks the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. It holds futures on about 24 commodities and was launched in 2006; the ten largest commodities total 75.4% of futures exposure. Index rules and rebalance dates are in the fund’s prospectus.

COMT · S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index

COMT tracks the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index. It holds futures on about 24 commodities and was launched in 2014; the ten largest commodities total 80.6% of futures exposure. Index rules and rebalance dates are in the fund’s prospectus.

Exact eligibility rules, caps and rebalance dates sit in each prospectus and index methodology; read them before relying on this summary.

GSG vs COMT, why yield and returns differ

Sector mix explains much of the gap

The two funds follow different indexes. The S&P GSCI Total Return Index weights commodities by world production, so oil and gas make up well over half of the fund. The S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index follows the S&P GSCI but chooses which contract month to hold using roll yield, so it holds the GSCI mix with a different roll rule.

GSG follows the S&P GSCI Total Return Index and COMT uses the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index. Because commodity funds hold futures, the return comes from three sources: the change in commodity prices, the roll yield or cost as contracts are replaced, and interest earned on the collateral. Differences in contract choice, roll timing and collateral income explain most of the gap between funds with similar baskets, and fees explain the rest.

How to decide between GSG and COMT

A step-by-step framework

Start with what separates them: The two funds follow different indexes. The S&P GSCI Total Return Index weights commodities by world production, so oil and gas make up well over half of the fund. The S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index follows the S&P GSCI but chooses which contract month to hold using roll yield, so it holds the GSCI mix with a different roll rule. Then check what you already own: the funds overlap by 92.5%, so holding both adds little.

  • Step 1 · Structure: GSG holds one S&P GSCI futures contract plus Treasury bills; COMT holds S&P GSCI futures chosen for the best roll yield, plus cash and short-term notes.
  • Step 2 · Cost: GSG 0.75% vs COMT 0.48% net expense ratio.
  • Step 3 · Tax form: GSG issues a Schedule K-1; COMT issues a 1099. This matters most for tax-advanced accounts and for Canadian investors.
  • Step 4 · Overlap: use the Diversification Calculator against what you own.

Size the position against your whole portfolio. Commodity funds are volatile and behave differently from stocks and bonds, so they usually play a small, deliberate role.

GSG vs COMT for Canadian investors

Currency, withholding tax and account type

GSG and COMT are U.S.-listed and trade in U.S. dollars, so buying them from a Canadian account usually involves converting Canadian dollars, which adds a cost on both entry and exit. A move in the U.S. dollar also changes your return in Canadian dollars.

Tax treatment depends on the structure. A fund that files a Schedule K-1 can create extra reporting for a Canadian holder and may not suit an RRSP or TFSA, while a fund that issues a 1099 is simpler. Confirm the rules for your account with a tax professional. This is general education, not tax advice.

Risks of GSG and COMT

What can go wrong

Shared risks

  • Commodity prices can swing sharply: oil, metals and crops respond to supply shocks, weather, politics and demand, and a broad commodity fund can fall while stocks rise.
  • Futures funds can lose value when the market is in contango, because rolling into a more expensive contract costs money even if the spot price does not change.
  • Energy is 52% of GSG and 56% of COMT, so oil and fuel prices drive a large share of the result.
  • Commodities produce no earnings or dividends of their own; returns come from price changes, roll yield and interest on collateral.

Fund-specific risks

  • GSG: ten largest commodities total 75.4% of futures exposure (Jan 2026 index weights); exposure to 24 commodities.
  • COMT: ten largest commodities total 80.6% of futures exposure (Nov 9, 2026); exposure to 24 commodities.
  • GSG: holds one GSCI future plus Treasury bills, so its result follows a single index, and it files a Schedule K-1. COMT: follows the GSCI with a dynamic roll rule, and its roll choice can differ from the index in a given month.
  • Both: not registered as ordinary stock funds; see each prospectus for legal form and the risks of futures.

GSG vs COMT taxes and account placement

General education, not tax advice

GSG is a commodity pool structured as a trust and issues a Schedule K-1, and futures gains are generally taxed under the 60/40 rule. COMT is a regulated fund that issues a standard 1099 rather than a Schedule K-1, but income from its futures and cash holdings can be taxed as ordinary income. Issuer pages list after-tax returns only for some funds, and gaps are marked Not captured.

For Canadian account types and withholding tax, see the Canadian section above. Confirm the rules for your account with a tax professional, and read how to build an ETF portfolio.

Other ETFs people compare

For context, not recommendations

Investors comparing GSG and COMT often also look at the other broad commodity funds in this group: DBC, PDBC, GSG, USCI, BCI and COMT. See the other commodity ETFs comparisons and the ETF research hub.

GSG vs COMT drawdown arithmetic

What a decline means in dollars
−10%–
−20%–
−30% (illustrative, GSG)–
−30% (illustrative, COMT)–

Recovery gain = decline ÷ (1 − decline). The scenarios use illustrative declines of 10%, 20% and 30% so you can see what a drop does to each fund. They are a rough guide to a bad year, not a worst-case figure. See the Position Size Calculator.

Tools to compare GSG vs COMT

Static weights from this page
Cost of the fee gap · compounded difference
GSG ending–
COMT ending–
Difference–

Ignores taxes, spreads and holdings differences. ETF Fee Calculator.

Where would your money land?
GSG largest commodity (18.2%)–
GSG top ten (75.4%)–
GSG energy (51.8%)–
COMT largest commodity (19.1%)–
COMT top ten (80.6%)–
COMT energy (56.0%)–

Check shared exposure with the Diversification Calculator.

GSG vs COMT, which fits which job

Characteristics, not recommendations

GSG may suit investors who want…

Production-weighted commodity exposure, heavy in oil and gas.

Strengths

  • Futures on 24 commodities
  • Flatter top ten: 75.4% against 80.6%
  • Led in 3 of 4 return windows (both to Sep 30, 2026)
  • Exchange-traded and priced all day

Watch points

  • Higher fee: 0.75% against 0.48%
  • Not a complete portfolio
  • Futures roll costs

COMT may suit investors who want…

GSCI exposure with a roll-yield rule.

Strengths

  • Lower fee: 0.48% against 0.75%
  • Futures on 24 commodities
  • Exchange-traded and priced all day
  • Holdings dated on this page

Watch points

  • Heavier top ten: 80.6% against 75.4%
  • Led in only 1 of 4 return windows (both to Sep 30, 2026)
  • Not a complete portfolio
  • Futures roll costs
Neither is a complete portfolio. Both hold commodity futures only and leave out stocks, bonds and other assets. Start from a core portfolio and size a position inside your allocation. This is general education, not tax or investment advice.

GSG vs COMT investor scenarios

Characteristics that fit, not recommendations
Lowest cost commodity exposureWants broad commodity futures at the lowest annual fee.GSG 0.75% · COMT 0.48%
Wants a simple tax formPrefers a 1099 to a Schedule K-1 and does not want extra tax reporting.GSG: Schedule K-1, COMT: 1099
Inflation hedgeAdds a small commodity position beside stocks and bonds to diversify inflation risk.Size it small
Canadian investorHolds U.S.-listed ETFs in USD and weighs tax forms and currency by account type.Confirm with a tax pro

GSG vs COMT key terms

Plain-language definitions
Futures contractAn agreement to buy or sell a commodity at a set price on a future date. Commodity funds hold futures, not barrels or bars.Both funds
Roll yieldThe gain or cost when a fund replaces an expiring contract with a later one. It can add to or subtract from returns.Futures funds
ContangoWhen later contracts cost more than the near one, so rolling costs money.Roll cost
Schedule K-1A partnership tax form some commodity pools issue instead of a 1099.GSG
GSG vs COMT at a glance: fees, commodity overlap, top commodities and returns for two commodity ETFs
GSG vs COMT at a glance, reviewed November 9, 2026

GSG vs COMT, frequently asked questions

Answers use the figures and dates shown above

Is GSG or COMT better?

In the GSG vs COMT question, neither is better for everyone. GSG and COMT differ in what they hold and what they charge. The two funds follow different indexes. The S&P GSCI Total Return Index weights commodities by world production, so oil and gas make up well over half of the fund. The S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index follows the S&P GSCI but chooses which contract month to hold using roll yield, so it holds the GSCI mix with a different roll rule.

Expense ratios are 0.75% and 0.48%. NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 55.21% vs 48.38%; 3 years 16.40% vs 14.56%; 5 years 16.09% vs 13.55%; 10 years 9.16% vs 9.63%. Neither is better for everyone; the choice turns on cost, tax form (K-1 or 1099), and what you already own.

GSG vs COMT, what are the expense ratios?

GSG charges 0.75% and COMT charges 0.48%, which is $75 and $48 a year per $10,000.

GSG vs COMT, how much do the funds overlap?

About 92.5% of the exposure is held by both funds, matched by commodity in issuer holdings dated Jan 2026 index weights and Nov 9, 2026. 9 commodities appear in both top-ten lists.

GSG vs COMT, what does each ETF track?

GSG tracks the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. COMT tracks the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll Index.

GSG vs COMT, what are the top commodities?

GSG (Jan 2026 index weights): Brent crude 18.23%, WTI crude 17.79%, Gold 7.24%, Copper 5.47%, Gasoil 5.22%. COMT (Nov 9, 2026): Brent crude 19.07%, WTI crude 18.07%, Gold 7.92%, Gasoil 7.9%, Copper 6.47%.

GSG vs COMT, which has performed better?

NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 55.21% vs 48.38%; 3 years 16.40% vs 14.56%; 5 years 16.09% vs 13.55%; 10 years 9.16% vs 9.63%. Returns depend on commodity prices, roll yield and collateral income, and past performance does not guarantee future results.

GSG vs COMT, can I own both?

On GSG vs COMT, you can, but they overlap by about 92.5%. 9 top-ten commodities are shared. Holding both adds almost no diversification: you are paying for two wrappers around nearly the same basket of commodities.

GSG vs COMT, how often do the funds pay dividends?

Distribution frequency: GSG not captured, COMT annual. Distribution rates are not captured for GSG and 1.61% for COMT; check each issuer page for the schedule.

GSG vs COMT, are they suitable for Canadian investors?

On GSG vs COMT, both are U.S.-listed and trade in U.S. dollars, so Canadians face currency conversion costs. GSG issues a Schedule K-1 and COMT issues a 1099, which can change reporting. Treatment differs across TFSA, RRSP and taxable accounts. This is general education, not tax advice.

GSG vs COMT, how do the funds differ by sector?

GSG (Jan 2026 index weights): energy 51.8%, agriculture 17.0%, industrial metals 12.1%. COMT (Nov 9, 2026): energy 56.0%, agriculture 14.0%, industrial metals 12.7%.

GSG vs COMT documents and sources

Open the issuer documents before relying on any figure

GSG · BlackRock (iShares)

COMT · BlackRock (iShares)

Third-party sources

iShares GSG fund page · iShares COMT fund page.

Methodology and limits

  • GSG figures come from BlackRock (iShares) fund pages and COMT figures from BlackRock (iShares) fund pages.
  • Dates are shown beside each figure; the issuer documents are linked below.
  • Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of each commodity held by both funds. Treasury bills, cash and swaps used as collateral are excluded, and the dates and bases differ, so treat the overlap as an estimate. Weights are shares of each fund’s futures exposure by underlying commodity, so Treasury bills, cash and collateral are excluded. GSG holds a single S&P GSCI future, so iShares publishes no commodity weights; the weights used are the S&P GSCI reference weights for 2026 published by S&P Dow Jones Indices (effective Jan 8, 2026). COMT weights are each commodity’s share of futures notional value in the iShares holdings file of Nov 9, 2026.
  • This page shows livestock as its own group for every fund.
  • Figures that were unavailable (beta, standard deviation, 52-week range, calendar-year returns) are left as Not captured, and nothing was filled from memory or from another fund.
  • Growth of $10,000 is derived from annualized NAV total returns on matched dates; dollar values are approximate.
  • Returns are issuer-reported NAV total returns (dates shown beside each figure), with market price and benchmark figures where published.

Educational research, not personalized investment, tax or legal advice, and not a recommendation to buy or sell any fund. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Calculators are hypothetical illustrations. Fund data are provided as published by the sources named and may differ from current figures.