© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

DBP

Seeded with the selected fund at 100%

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

Commodities Funds · 113 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

DBP

Commodity Pool

Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund

Expense Ratio
0.73%
AUM
$219M
Inception
1/8/2007
1Y Return
+5.3%28th %ilevs 113 asset-class peers

The index Commodities consist of Gold and Silver. The fund invests in futures contracts in an attempt to track its corresponding index.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
DBP
Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund
5.3%5.3%35.7%0.04-33.3%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
DBP
Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund
-8.5%-2.0%-1.6%-8.3%-0.9%-14.5%5.3%25.0%31.0%17.4%8.1%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
DBP
Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund
31.4%-3.0%26.6%36.1%5.1%6.0%-31.4%-6.5%-12.1%8.2%10.6%-3.8%15.9%26.8%-7.8%-0.8%8.7%26.7%73.4%-8.5%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Name
Ann. αβ MKTβ SMBβ HMLβ RMWβ CMAβ UMDβ iHMLR²Obs
DBPUS
Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund
37.7%1.11**-0.460.07-0.52*0.56*-0.71**-1.72**0.43226
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. US factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). From 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Family
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Commodities
Peer Group Benchmark
Structure
Commodity Pool
Underlying
Precious metals futures
Peer Group
Commodities - Metals (39 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
62
3Y Peer Percentile
82
Expense Ratio
0.73%
AUM
$219M
Yield
2.62%
Inception
1/8/2007
Turnover
0%
Strategy Summary

The index Commodities consist of Gold and Silver. The fund invests in futures contracts in an attempt to track its corresponding index.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio from the sponsor's website. Turnover from market data (10/6/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Summary may be from an older prospectus.

DBP is a commodity pool, not a registered fund, so it files no holdings report.

Factor DetailsRef: Commodities Funds

DBP has no stock-level metrics. Fund-level metrics such as AUM and expense ratio are available in the picker.

ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); the shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Commodities Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
DBP
Invesco DB Precious Metals Fund
Peer Group
39 funds
Peer Asset Class
113 funds
YTD Return
-8.53%-5.26%3219.73%15
1Y Return
5.35%2.83%6224.77%28
3Y Return (Ann.)
30.96%30.44%8217.14%93
5Y Return (Ann.)
17.43%18.02%3911.86%72
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.73%0.56%290.71%48
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (41 share classes across 39 funds). One share class shown per fund — the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class; percentile ranks and medians are computed against the same deduped set. Quartile chips fill the layer the fund's rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). Funds without a full return history rank only on the horizons they cover.

Similar Funds

See more rows — create a free account▾

Nearest funds across the whole universe, by holdings and behavior — the peer taxonomy is ignored, so matches can come from any category.

Top Similarity75
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1GLTR
abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket ETF
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
75--
2CEF
Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
68--
3GLD
SPDR Gold Shares
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
65--
4PHYS
Sprott Physical Gold Trust
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
65--
5BAR
GraniteShares Gold Trust
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
65--
6IAU
iShares Gold Trust
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
65--
7QGLDX
Quantified Gold Futures Tracking Fund
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
63--
8OUNZ
VanEck Merk Gold ETF
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
63--
9SGOL
abrdn Physical Gold Shares ETF
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
63--
10AAAU
Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF
Commodities - Metals
Commodities - Metals
63--

The method columns are members-only — create a free account to see these figures.

ⓘ Methodology

Rows are the consensus top matches (a fund must place in at least two methods' top 250 to qualify, and matches missing more than one of this fund's own methods are not ranked — a row scored on fewer methods is a noisier estimate, not a better match). Click a method column to see that method's own top matches across the whole universe instead. Gray (N) beside each method's metric is that fund's rank in the whole universe on that method. Similarity is a percentile among match-grade fund pairs, 0–100 — 87 means the pair is closer than 87% of the strongest matches in the universe, averaged across the methods — so it compares across funds: index clones tie at the top with thousands of other clone pairs, so scores top out in the high 80s to 90s, while a one-of-a-kind fund's best match can score in the 30s. Rows are ordered by the Consensus Rank — the geometric mean of those universe ranks, shown in each cell's tooltip — and the score is held down the list to the level of the closest match above it, so equal scores mean equally close and the number reads as a floor. A dash means that method has no figure for the pair at all (one of them lacks the holdings or return history it needs). Hover a column header for each method's definition. The “Top…” strips above compare against every fund's own top match across the whole universe (they deliberately don't follow the Peer Universe selector); Top Similarity is simply the best match's score, with no reference band; the Holdings and Active Tilt strips carry no reference band because computing every fund's best book overlap would require a full holdings scan per fund — the dot stands alone on its natural 0–100% scale. One share class shown per fund, and a fund's own sister share classes are excluded from its Top-match strips. Consensus Rank is the geometric mean of the match's universe-wide rank across the methods (#1.0 = top match on every one). Return Correlation = correlation of market-hedged daily returns over the trailing two years (CAPM residuals), so only market-beta co-movement is removed; requires ~18 months of daily history (378 of the window's 504 trading days). Fama-French Similarity = 1/(1+d), where d is the Euclidean distance between factor betas (market, size, value, profitability, investment, momentum, intangible value) from up to three years of daily returns (min 378 daily observations and regression R² of at least 0.25); 1.00 = identical loadings.