ETFCommodities.com House Model — YTD Attribution Report
YTD Review
ETFCommodities.com’s House Model delivered a strong absolute return year to date, but trailed the broad commodity benchmark as futures-led commodity beta, particularly oil-linked exposure, continued to outpace the model’s diversified ETF basket. The House Model gained 31.63% YTD versus GSG up 49.18%, producing -14.13% of active return.
The benchmark, GSG, is the iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust, a futures-based commodity benchmark with diversified exposure across energy, metals, agriculture, and livestock markets. Its structure helped it capture the 2026 commodity rally more directly than a multi-sleeve ETF model that includes energy equities, precious metals, industrial metals, miners, agriculture, and thematic materials exposure.
The attribution story remained concentrated. USO was the clear positive active contributor, while GLD, UNG, SLV, DBA, MOO, PALL, COPX, and miner-related exposure drove the active shortfall. The result was not a weak absolute commodity call; it was a benchmark-relative issue in a year when GSG benefited disproportionately from the oil-led commodity shock.
Model Performance and Attribution
| Metric / Holding | YTD Return or Active Contribution |
| ETFCommodities.com House Model | +31.63% |
| Benchmark: GSG | +49.18% |
| Active Return | -14.13% |
| USO | +4.55% |
| XES | +0.41% |
| XOP | -0.22% |
| REMX | -0.26% |
| LIT | -0.34% |
| ET | -0.74% |
| CPER | -0.75% |
| SETM | -0.75% |
| PICK | -0.84% |
| PPLT | -0.84% |
| COPX | -0.92% |
| PALL | -1.13% |
| MOO | -1.39% |
| DBA | -1.40% |
| SLV | -1.42% |
| UNG | -2.16% |
| GLD | -4.85% |
USO was the model’s standout contributor, adding +4.55% of active return as crude markets remained tight and volatile. StreetAccount’s May 19 energy update showed WTI and Brent still trading above $100, with oil markets moving around Iran-related headlines, Strait of Hormuz disruption risk, refinery-throughput cuts, SPR releases, and shifting diplomatic signals.
The largest detractor was GLD, at -4.85% of active contribution. Gold remained supported by longer-term macro and central-bank demand themes, but it lagged GSG’s oil-led surge and came under short-term pressure from stabilizing Treasury yields, a firmer U.S. dollar, and persistent inflation concerns. StreetAccount’s May 19 metals update showed gold lower on the day, with gold up 4.69% YTD, silver up 8.22% YTD, and copper up 9.68% YTD in its metals snapshot.
By sleeve, attribution was as follows:
| Sleeve | Holdings | YTD Active Contribution |
| Oil & Gas | XOP, XES, ET, UNG, USO | +1.84% |
| Precious Metals | GLD, SLV | -6.27% |
| Industrial Metals | REMX, PPLT, PALL, LIT, CPER | -3.32% |
| Metal Miners | PICK, COPX, SETM | -2.51% |
| Agriculture | DBA, MOO | -2.79% |
Energy was the only positive sleeve on active attribution, and even there the result was mixed. USO and XES helped, while UNG, ET, and XOP detracted. Holding-level contributions summed to roughly -13.05%, with the balance of the -14.13% active result reflecting allocation interaction effects and rounding.
Commodity ETF Performance and Flow Trends
According to ETFCommodities.com’s Return and Flow Database, using FactSet Research Systems Inc.price, return, and flow data as of May 19, the commodity ETF universe showed a sharp split between performance and capital allocation. The model universe had approximately $3.50B of net YTD outflows, but that was almost entirely due to precious metals redemptions. Excluding GLD and SLV, the rest of the universe showed roughly $5.28B of net YTD inflows.
| Category | Funds in Universe | Avg. 1M Return | Avg. 3M Return | Avg. 6M Return | YTD Flows | YTD Read-Through |
| Oil & Gas | 5 | +6.1% | +17.9% | +32.5% | +$1.08B | Strongest attribution sleeve; USO led active contribution |
| Precious Metals | 2 | -3.0% | -1.8% | +35.3% | -$8.78B | Largest flow drag; GLD and SLV drove active underperformance |
| Industrial Metals | 5 | +0.6% | +5.2% | +30.6% | +$478M | Positive flows, but PGM and copper sleeves lagged GSG |
| Metal Miners | 3 | -2.4% | +2.3% | +44.5% | +$2.63B | Strong YTD sponsorship, but May pullback weighed on attribution |
| Agriculture | 2 | +0.6% | +1.9% | +13.6% | +$1.09B | Positive flows, but DBA and MOO detracted versus GSG |
The most important flow trend was the continued rotation away from liquid precious metals ETFs and toward copper miners, energy, agriculture, and critical materials. GLD and SLV saw roughly $8.78B of combined YTD outflows, while COPX, XOP, REMX, DBA, MOO, PICK, and SETM all attracted meaningful capital. ET-US flow fields were unavailable in the FactSet return-flow data and were excluded from flow totals.
This flow pattern matters for the model. Investors were not abandoning commodities; they were reallocating within the commodity ETF complex. Precious metals ETFs were being redeemed even as gold and silver retained positive longer-term returns, while copper miners, rare earths, energy equities, and agriculture continued to attract capital.
Top YTD Flow Winners and Losers
| Top YTD Flow ETFs | Category | YTD Flow | 1M Return | 3M Return | 6M Return | ||||||
| COPX | Metal Miners | +$1.91B | -5.3% | -4.7% | +43.9% | ||||||
| XOP | Oil & Gas | +$1.08B | +4.0% | +12.6% | +25.8% | ||||||
| REMX | Industrial Metals | +$701M | +4.9% | +16.5% | +51.3% | ||||||
| DBA | Agriculture | +$596M | +3.3% | +7.6% | +9.1% | ||||||
| MOO | Agriculture | +$491M | -2.0% | -3.7% | +18.1% | ||||||
| PICK | Metal Miners | +$428M | -0.5% | +4.7% | +42.6% | ||||||
| SETM | Metal Miners | +$290M | -1.3% | +6.8% | +47.1% | ||||||
| CPER | Industrial Metals | +$235M | +0.2% | +5.0% | +21.3% | ||||||
| XES | Oil & Gas | +$165M | +5.9% | +11.4% | +55.8% | ||||||
| LIT | Industrial Metals | +$52M | +7.4% | +21.0% | +43.3%
|
||||||
| Largest YTD Outflow ETFs | Category | YTD Flow | 1M Return | 3M Return | 6M Return | ||||||
| GLD | Precious Metals | -$5.46B | -3.2% | -5.8% | +15.3% | ||||||
| SLV | Precious Metals | -$3.32B | -2.8% | +2.2% | +55.3% | ||||||
| PPLT | Industrial Metals | -$335M | -4.3% | -2.7% | +31.7% | ||||||
| PALL | Industrial Metals | -$175M | -5.3% | -13.8% | +5.4% | ||||||
| UNG | Oil & Gas | -$87M | -1.5% | -10.0% | -24.9% | ||||||
| USO | Oil & Gas | -$80M | +16.3% | +70.0% | +86.2% | ||||||
The flow tables show two important disconnects. First, USO was the strongest active contributor despite YTD outflows, demonstrating that performance leadership was not necessarily aligned with investor allocation behavior. Second, COPX was the largest YTD inflow ETF but still detracted from active return, reflecting a strong longer-term copper-miner sponsorship theme that did not keep pace with GSG’s oil-led benchmark move.
May Market Backdrop
Energy
Energy remained the center of the commodity tape. StreetAccount’s May 19 update showed WTI at $108.27, Brent at $110.88, and natural gas up 1.8% to $3.076 in pre-market trading. Oil was lower at the time of the update after President Trump said he would hold off on military action against Iran, but prices remained elevated because of ongoing Strait of Hormuz risk, refinery disruptions, SPR releases, and volatility around negotiations.
StreetAccount also noted that Chinese state refiners were processing 8.4M bpd in May, down from 8.6M bpdin April and 9.5M bpd in March, as supply disruption and weak refining margins weighed on throughput. That helped reinforce the push-pull in crude markets: supply risk and geopolitical disruption supported prices, while demand sensitivity and refinery-margin pressure created intermittent pullbacks.
Natural gas was less helpful to attribution. UNG detracted -2.16% YTD despite a recent bounce. StreetAccount said natural gas had reached its best close in nearly eight weeks, supported by East Coast heat, warmer late-May forecasts, stronger power burn, and firmer LNG feedgas flows. The issue for the model was that the recent improvement was not enough to offset weaker YTD performance versus the benchmark.
Metals and Mining
The metals backdrop remained bifurcated. Gold and silver had positive YTD commodity-level returns, but ETF flows were sharply negative and active attribution was poor. GLD and SLV were both meaningful detractors, and their combined outflows dominated the universe-level flow picture.
StreetAccount’s May 19 update noted that gold was trading lower as Treasury yields stabilized and inflation concerns persisted. It also highlighted China’s aluminum output surge, rare earth shortage discussions, and continued attention around copper and critical-materials supply chains.
Industrial metals and miners retained stronger investor sponsorship than precious metals ETFs. COPX, REMX, PICK, SETM, CPER, and LIT all attracted capital or retained positive longer-term return profiles. However, capital inflows did not translate into benchmark-relative performance by May 19. COPX, for example, attracted $1.91B YTD but was down 5.3% over one month and 4.7% over three months in the FactSet return-flow data.
Agriculture
Agriculture flows were positive, but attribution was negative. DBA and MOO combined for roughly $1.09B of YTD inflows, yet together detracted -2.79% from active performance. This shows that investors continued to allocate capital to agricultural commodity and agribusiness exposure, but those sleeves did not keep pace with GSG’s oil-heavy strength.
The agriculture sleeve remains important to the model’s diversification profile. However, through May 19, it acted as a relative drag because broad commodity benchmark leadership was concentrated in energy and futures-linked exposure rather than in agriculture and agribusiness equities.
Model Interpretation
The House Model’s +31.63% YTD return is strong in absolute terms, but the -14.13% active result shows that 2026’s commodity rally has remained unusually benchmark-friendly. GSG’s commodity-futures structure captured the oil-led surge more efficiently, while the model’s diversified construction reduced concentration risk but created relative drag from precious metals, natural gas, agriculture, and miners.
The key attribution lesson is that the model had the right broad commodity exposure, but the wrong relative mix for an oil-led benchmark regime. USO alone added +4.55% of active contribution, but that was overwhelmed by GLD at -4.85%, UNG at -2.16%, SLV at -1.42%, and the combined drag from agriculture and miners.
The flow data are more constructive than the attribution data. FactSet flows show investors adding to copper miners, rare earths, energy equities, agriculture, and critical materials. However, ETF sponsorship has not yet translated into benchmark-relative leadership. For the model to close the active gap, non-oil sleeves need either stronger relative returns or a moderation in the oil-futures rally that has favored GSG.
Bottom Line
ETFCommodities.com’s House Model has produced a robust YTD gain, but it has lagged GSG as the benchmark benefited from a futures-led, oil-centered commodity rally. USO was the standout positive contributor, while GLD, UNG, SLV, DBA, MOO, and mining-related exposure drove most of the active shortfall.
The model enters the rest of Q2 with a constructive but selective setup. Oil remains the central driver of benchmark-relative performance. Precious metals have supportive long-term macro and central-bank demand fundamentals but are losing ETF assets. Copper, rare earths, and critical materials continue to attract capital, but need stronger return confirmation. Agriculture has positive flow support, but still needs performance breadth to offset GSG’s oil-heavy strength.
Sources
- ETFCommodities.com House Model Attribution, as of May 18, 2026.
- ETFCommodities.com Return and Flow Database, as of May 19, 2026; price, return, and flow data from FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- StreetAccount Sector Summary — Metals & Mining / Energy, May 18–19, 2026; news and market commentary from StreetAccount.
- BlackRock / iShares, GSG fund overview and fact sheet.
- U.S. Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook — May 2026.
- International Energy Agency, Oil Market Report — May 2026.
- World Gold Council, Gold Demand Trends: Q1 2026.
