BATT.L vs. CMOP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BATT.L (L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF) and CMOP.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - BATT.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index, while CMOP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BATT.L returned 16.19%/yr vs 10.90%/yr for CMOP.L. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BATT.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for CMOP.L.

Performance

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATT.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BATT.L is traded in USD, while CMOP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CMOP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BATT.L achieves a 35.17% return, which is significantly higher than CMOP.L's 24.53% return.

BATT.L

• 1D: -2.55%
• 1M: -1.49%
• YTD: 35.17%
• 6M: 40.03%
• 1Y: 128.07%
• 3Y*: 28.19%
• 5Y*: 16.19%
• 10Y*: —

CMOP.L

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -3.57%
• YTD: 24.53%
• 6M: 24.38%
• 1Y: 37.59%
• 3Y*: 15.32%
• 5Y*: 10.90%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BATT.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF	35.17%	71.43%	-1.20%	8.80%	-14.18%	15.68%	81.32%	16.59%	-24.50%
CMOP.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc	24.53%	16.40%	4.25%	-8.12%	14.71%	27.55%	-4.27%	7.46%	-12.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BATT.L and CMOP.L is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2018	0.26

The correlation between BATT.L and CMOP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.26 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BATT.L	CMOP.L
Basic Materials	36.9%	35.8%
Industrials	33.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	15.0%	12.9%
Technology	11.8%	5.6%
Utilities	3.0%	-
Communication Services	-	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	9.7%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	17.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	5.8%

Return for Risk

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BATT.L

BATT.L Risk / Return Rank: 95
BATT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
BATT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
BATT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 92
BATT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
BATT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CMOP.L

CMOP.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
CMOP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CMOP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
CMOP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CMOP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 65

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATT.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BATT.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.24	2.13	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.61	2.63	+1.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.38	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.95	5.01	+3.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.19	11.56	+18.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BATT.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.24, which is higher than the CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BATT.L and CMOP.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BATT.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.24	2.13	+2.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63	0.64	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	0.48	+0.22

Drawdowns

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BATT.L drawdown since its inception was -39.70%, which is greater than CMOP.L's maximum drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BATT.L and CMOP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BATT.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.70%	-33.25%	-6.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.23%	-7.47%	-6.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.90%	-11.58%	-22.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.90%	-26.47%	-7.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.46%	-5.50%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.01%	-12.29%	+0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.23%	3.24%	+0.99%

Volatility

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATT.L) has a higher volatility of 11.35% compared to Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) at 6.32%. This indicates that BATT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMOP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BATT.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.35%	6.32%	+5.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.92%	15.80%	+8.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.01%	17.56%	+12.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.51%	17.06%	+8.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.15%	15.27%	+9.88%

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BATT.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than CMOP.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

BATT.L vs. CMOP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BATT.L nor CMOP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BATT.L and CMOP.L in my portfolio?

BATT.L and CMOP.L have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BATT.L or CMOP.L?

On fees, CMOP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BATT.L or CMOP.L?

CMOP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BATT.L.

What is the main difference between BATT.L and CMOP.L?

BATT.L is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CMOP.L is Commodities. BATT.L tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index, while CMOP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BATT.L and 0.19% for CMOP.L.