CEFD vs. SLVO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and SLVO (UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while SLVO is a Silver fund tracking the Credit Suisse NASDAQ Silver FLOWS 106 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CEFD returned 18.31% vs 62.53% for SLVO. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SLVO.

Performance

CEFD vs. SLVO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 6.26% return, which is significantly lower than SLVO's 13.49% return.

CEFD

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 3.13%
• 10Y*: —

SLVO

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: 4.05%
• YTD: 13.49%
• 6M: 17.86%
• 1Y: 62.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFD vs. SLVO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	6.26%	14.15%	10.37%
SLVO UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN	13.49%	71.20%	1.24%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFD and SLVO is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2024	0.27

Return for Risk

CEFD vs. SLVO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

SLVO

SLVO Risk / Return Rank: 66
SLVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
SLVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
SLVO Omega Ratio Rank: 72
SLVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
SLVO Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

CEFD vs. SLVO - 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 UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO). 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	SLVO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.13	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	2.39	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.44	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	3.65	-2.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.84	15.01	-8.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CEFD vs. SLVO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFD Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the SLVO Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFD and SLVO, 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

	CEFD	SLVO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	2.13	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	1.61	-1.09

Drawdowns

CEFD vs. SLVO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, which is greater than SLVO's maximum drawdown of -17.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and SLVO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFD	SLVO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.95%	-17.23%	-19.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-17.23%	+4.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.14%	-3.22%	+2.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.72%	-3.13%	-8.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	4.18%	-1.50%

Volatility

CEFD vs. SLVO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 4.05%, while UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN (SLVO) has a volatility of 6.39%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SLVO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEFD	SLVO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	6.39%	-2.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.27%	27.33%	-16.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	29.53%	-16.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.93%	25.23%	-7.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.31%	25.23%	-7.92%

CEFD vs. SLVO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SLVO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFD vs. SLVO - Dividend Comparison

CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%, less than SLVO's 46.44% yield.

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%
SLVO UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered Call ETN	46.44%	19.35%	14.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFD and SLVO in my portfolio?

CEFD and SLVO have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEFD or SLVO?

SLVO has higher volatility (6.39%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs SLVO's -17.23%.

Which ETF is better, CEFD or SLVO?

On 1-year performance, SLVO leads with 62.53% vs 18.31% for CEFD. On fees, SLVO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, CEFD or SLVO?

Over the 1-year period, SLVO has performed better with a 62.53% return vs 18.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFD or SLVO?

SLVO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for CEFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFD or SLVO?

SLVO has the higher dividend yield at 46.44%, compared with 14.58% for CEFD.

What is the main difference between CEFD and SLVO?

CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while SLVO tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Silver FLOWS 106 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 0.65% for SLVO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SLVO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 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.