PDBC vs VTI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

PDBC and VTI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. PDBC is Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF, while VTI is Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF. VTI is broader by holdings count, with 3,524 positions versus 3 for PDBC. VTI has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has PDBC ahead on AIQ Score, 75 versus 60.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
PDBC
Invesco
vs
VTI
Vanguard
PDBC
Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF
Issuer
Invesco
Inception
2014-11-07
VTI
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2001-05-24

What is the main difference between PDBC and VTI?

VTI holds 3,524 positions to PDBC's 3, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
PDBC
0.74%
VTI
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVTI
Holdings
PDBC
3
VTI
3,524
Broader reported basketVTI
1Y return
PDBC
+51.8%
VTI
+15.8%
Trailing performancePDBC
Annualized volatility
PDBC
20.8%
VTI
13%
Lower realized volatilityVTI
MetricPDBCVTI
Fund
Expense ratio0.74%0.03%
Holdings33,524
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months2.54%1.05%
Average volume6,428,4183,115,564
Performance
1Y return+51.8%+15.8%
YTD return+51.1%+12.5%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+11.9%+11.4%
Risk
Annualized volatility20.8%13%
Max drawdown (1Y)-16.6%-9.2%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-27.6%-25.4%
Beta-0.401.02
Sharpe ratio1.930.86
Sortino ratio2.961.32
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score75/10060/100
AIQ Edge Score10/108/10
Momentum77/10051/100
Risk Resilience78/10086/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Coverage 63/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 8/10

PDBC leads

PDBC leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions.

Stable: 2 of 3 evidence groups support PDBC, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 3Comparison trend: Strengthening
PDBC

Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
75/100
AIQ Edge Score
10/10
VTI

Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PDBC over VTI, 75 versus 60 as of Oct 21, 2026. PDBC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while VTI holds the stronger risk resilience profile. PDBC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor PDBC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. PDBC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 15 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

PDBC vs VTI: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantPDBCVTIFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.74%0.03%VTI
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings33,524VTI
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield2.54%1.05%PDBC
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-27.6%-25.4%VTI
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year20.8%13%VTI

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

PDBC
+75.3%
VTI
+71.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

PDBC $17,534 · VTI $17,146

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare PDBC and VTI against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

PDBC advantage
0
VTI advantage
  • Momentum77 vs 51
    PDBC +26
  • Risk Resilience78 vs 86
    VTI +8
  • Quality72 vs 74
    Even

2 of 3 evidence groups favor PDBC. PDBC’s edge is concentrated in momentum; VTI keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

PDBC0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.

VTI+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +4

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

PDBC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PDBC and VTI both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

PDBC (Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.

VTI (Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasurePDBCVTIWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.74%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings33,524More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume6,428,4183,115,564Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility20.8%13%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-16.6%-9.2%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio1.930.86Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta-0.401.02Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Cash & Others100.0% vs 0.2%
Technology0.0% vs 38.2%
Financial Services0.0% vs 11.6%
Healthcare0.0% vs 9.9%
Communication Services0.0% vs 9.1%
Industrials0.0% vs 8.5%
Consumer Cyclical0.0% vs 8.5%
Consumer Defensive0.0% vs 4.2%
PDBCVTI

How much of the same holdings they own

PDBC and VTI share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

2 holdings are unique to PDBC, and 3,499 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

What PDBC adds that VTI doesn’t

HoldingPDBCVTI
Invesco Premier US Government Money Portfolio75.5%Not held
POWERSHARES CAYMAN FUND24.42%Not held

What VTI adds that PDBC doesn’t

HoldingVTIPDBC
NVDANVIDIA Corp6.4%Not held
AAPLApple Inc6.29%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp4.79%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc3.65%Not held
GOOGLAlphabet Inc2.9%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.56%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 3 covered evidence groups favor PDBC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScorePDBC75 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsPDBCPrice vs 50-day 4.1% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day 16.6% vs 5.3%
Risk ResilienceVTIRisk Resilience 78 vs 86
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PDBC and VTI and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Stable

The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on PDBC.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

PDBC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 15 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 21PDBC leads above the line · VTI leads belowOct 20
Today
PDBC +15
75 vs 60
7 sessions ago
PDBC +13
72 vs 59
30 sessions ago
PDBC +6
66 vs 60
90 sessions ago
PDBC +8
74 vs 66

The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 5 when VTI moved ahead of PDBC.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

PDBC

5 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral

Only PDBC

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
VTIConflicted

2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VTI

  • EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, 52-Week High Proximity.

VTI is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

PDBCNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.2%, AIQ 0 points).

VTIConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.55%, AIQ +1 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1VTI closes the Momentum gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to PDBC's edge.
  2. 2VTI's ATR Contraction - Coiling turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
  3. 3PDBC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

PDBC leads 6 of 6 windows
MetricPDBCVTI
1 week (5 sessions)0.2%-1.1%
1 month (20 sessions)3.4%-1.1%
3 months (63 sessions)12.4%2.2%
6 months (126 sessions)15.1%8.4%
Year to date51.1%12.5%
1 year (252 sessions)51.8%15.8%

Technicals

PDBC has the stronger structure
MetricPDBCVTI
RSI (14)68.755.2
ADX (14)22.713.4
Price vs 50-day4.1%0.2%
Price vs 200-day16.6%5.3%
Volatility (1M, annualized)15.4%9.8%

Risk

VTI is the more resilient
MetricPDBCVTI
Beta-0.41.02
Sharpe ratio1.930.86
Sortino ratio2.961.32
Max drawdown-16.6%-9.2%
Current drawdown-0.5%-1.9%
Annualized volatility20.8%13%
Value at risk (95%)-1.9%-1.4%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between PDBC and VTI?

VTI holds 3,524 positions to PDBC's 3, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do PDBC and VTI overlap?

PDBC and VTI share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 2 holdings are unique to PDBC, and 3,499 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, PDBC or VTI?

VTI holds more positions: 3,524 versus 3 for PDBC.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VTI has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.74% for PDBC.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

PDBC, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 2.54% against 1.05% for VTI.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

PDBC has been more volatile over the past year, at 20.8% annualized against 13% for VTI.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VTI fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -25.4% against -27.6% for PDBC.

Compare PDBC and VTI with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.