CEFD vs. MTUL
CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and MTUL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while MTUL is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFD returned 3.13%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for MTUL. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
CEFD vs. MTUL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 6.26% return, which is significantly lower than MTUL's 60.22% return.
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 15.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.13%
- 10Y*
- —
MTUL
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 27.97%
- YTD
- 60.22%
- 6M
- 59.66%
- 1Y
- 75.85%
- 3Y*
- 59.49%
- 5Y*
- 19.95%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFD vs. MTUL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 6.26% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 18.47% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 60.22% | 27.42% | 58.70% | 10.66% | -37.97% | 7.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFD and MTUL is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.68 |
The correlation between CEFD and MTUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CEFD vs. MTUL — Risk / Return Rank
CEFD
MTUL
CEFD vs. MTUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL). 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.
| CEFD | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.32 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.47 | 3.20 | -1.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.84 | 12.78 | -5.94 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEFD | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.43 | 1.73 | -0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 | 0.47 | -0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.41 | +0.11 |
Drawdowns
CEFD vs. MTUL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, smaller than the maximum MTUL drawdown of -56.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and MTUL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFD | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.95% | -56.83% | +19.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -23.86% | +11.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.76% | -39.15% | +17.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.95% | -56.83% | +19.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.14% | -0.74% | -0.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.72% | -22.68% | +10.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.68% | 5.96% | -3.28% |
Volatility
CEFD vs. MTUL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 4.05%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a volatility of 20.29%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFD | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.05% | 20.29% | -16.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.27% | 37.63% | -26.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.86% | 43.98% | -31.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.93% | 42.81% | -24.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.31% | 43.65% | -26.34% |
CEFD vs. MTUL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CEFD and MTUL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
CEFD vs. MTUL - Dividend Comparison
CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%, while MTUL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 14.58% | 14.88% | 13.90% | 14.76% | 16.56% | 10.31% | 5.37% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFD and MTUL have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUL has higher volatility (20.29%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs MTUL's -56.83%.
On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 19.95% vs 3.13% for CEFD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 19.95% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CEFD and MTUL have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for MTUL.
CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while MTUL tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index.
MTUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.43), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CEFD and MTUL
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer