CEFD vs. UCIB
CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFD returned 3.13%/yr vs 11.77%/yr for UCIB. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for UCIB.
Performance
CEFD vs. UCIB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 6.26% return, which is significantly lower than UCIB's 20.67% return.
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 15.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.13%
- 10Y*
- —
UCIB
- 1D
- -1.83%
- 1M
- -5.93%
- YTD
- 20.67%
- 6M
- 21.76%
- 1Y
- 29.68%
- 3Y*
- 13.51%
- 5Y*
- 11.77%
- 10Y*
- 10.30%
CEFD vs. UCIB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 6.26% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 22.09% | 21.81% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 20.67% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -2.26% | 18.24% | 37.34% | 27.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFD and UCIB 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 | 0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.19 |
The correlation between CEFD and UCIB shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. UCIB — Risk / Return Rank
CEFD
UCIB
CEFD vs. UCIB - 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 CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB). 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 | UCIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.29 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.47 | 1.92 | -0.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.84 | 6.55 | +0.29 |
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 | UCIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.43 | 0.94 | +0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 | 0.44 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.45 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.38 | +0.14 |
Drawdowns
CEFD vs. UCIB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, roughly equal to the maximum UCIB drawdown of -36.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and UCIB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFD | UCIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.95% | -36.94% | -0.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -15.53% | +3.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.76% | -16.18% | -5.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.95% | -20.95% | -16.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.94% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.14% | -15.53% | +14.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.72% | -9.06% | -2.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.68% | 4.54% | -1.86% |
Volatility
CEFD vs. UCIB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 4.05%, while ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a volatility of 16.62%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFD | UCIB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.05% | 16.62% | -12.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.27% | 31.05% | -19.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.86% | 31.72% | -18.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.93% | 26.74% | -8.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.31% | 23.22% | -5.91% |
CEFD vs. UCIB - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UCIB's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEFD vs. UCIB - Dividend Comparison
CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%, while UCIB 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% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFD and UCIB 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.
UCIB has higher volatility (16.62%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs UCIB's -36.94%.
On 5-year performance, UCIB leads with 11.77% vs 3.13% for CEFD. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% 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.
Over the 5-year period, UCIB has performed better with a 11.77% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for CEFD.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 0.55% for UCIB.
CEFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.94), 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 UCIB
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