BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

BCOM.L (L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF) and CXAP.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both Commodities funds - BCOM.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return while CXAP.L tracks the UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCOM.L returned 10.51%/yr vs 11.37%/yr for CXAP.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BCOM.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for CXAP.L.

Performance

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCOM.L achieves a 20.90% return, which is significantly higher than CXAP.L's 16.60% return.

BCOM.L

• 1D: 0.64%
• 1M: 2.17%
• 6M: 16.01%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 1Y: 30.69%
• 3Y*: 12.81%
• 5Y*: 10.51%
• 10Y*: —

CXAP.L

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: -2.57%
• 6M: 10.53%
• YTD: 16.60%
• 1Y: 29.03%
• 3Y*: 15.58%
• 5Y*: 11.37%
• 10Y*: 10.01%

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

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCOM.L L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF	20.90%	16.19%	4.43%	-7.25%	15.63%	27.35%	-2.99%	5.14%	-9.87%	6.89%
CXAP.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	16.60%	18.99%	6.86%	-5.88%	14.04%	35.55%	-2.02%	11.45%	-6.61%	14.66%

Correlation

The correlation between BCOM.L and CXAP.L is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 6, 2017	0.72

The correlation between BCOM.L and CXAP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (all time) to 0.86 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCOM.L

BCOM.L Risk / Return Rank: 59
BCOM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BCOM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
BCOM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BCOM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BCOM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 49

CXAP.L

CXAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
CXAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
CXAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 71
CXAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
CXAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BCOM.L	CXAP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.78	1.83	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	2.49	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.31	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	2.39	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.65	8.04	-1.38

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCOM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCOM.L and CXAP.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.

Drawdowns

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCOM.L drawdown since its inception was -31.65%, smaller than the maximum CXAP.L drawdown of -36.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCOM.L and CXAP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCOM.L	CXAP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.65%	-36.00%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.33%	-11.76%	-2.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.33%	-12.96%	-1.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.27%	-22.98%	-3.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.29%	-8.84%	+0.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.63%	-9.06%	-2.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.53%	3.50%	+1.03%

Volatility

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) have volatilities of 4.53% and 4.36%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCOM.L	CXAP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	4.36%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.82%	13.03%	+1.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.93%	15.40%	+1.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.81%	17.38%	-0.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.35%	16.40%	-1.05%

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCOM.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CXAP.L's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCOM.L vs. CXAP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BCOM.L nor CXAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCOM.L and CXAP.L in my portfolio?

BCOM.L and CXAP.L have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BCOM.L or CXAP.L?

On fees, BCOM.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCOM.L or CXAP.L?

BCOM.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for CXAP.L.

What is the main difference between BCOM.L and CXAP.L?

BCOM.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped. They also come from different issuers: L&G and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for BCOM.L and 0.34% for CXAP.L.