Screener
CCOM vs OMFL
Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF vs Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Key differences
- OMFL costs 0.70% less per year.
- OMFL is significantly larger than CCOM — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- CCOM covers emerging markets markets; OMFL covers north america.
- CCOM follows a active selection strategy; OMFL uses systematic alpha.
- OMFL has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| CCOM | OMFL | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.99% | 0.29% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $105M | $4.6B |
| Since | 2026 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.78% |
| Asset class | alternative | alternative |
| Region | emerging markets | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | systematic alpha |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +23.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +14.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +8.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.72 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 12.19% |
| Max drawdown | -4.45% | -33.24% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Explore further