CEFD vs. USML
CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and USML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while USML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFD returned 2.85%/yr vs 7.17%/yr for USML. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
CEFD vs. USML - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFD achieves a 5.55% return, which is significantly higher than USML's -0.53% return.
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 0.88%
- YTD
- 5.55%
- 6M
- 5.82%
- 1Y
- 16.51%
- 3Y*
- 14.99%
- 5Y*
- 2.85%
- 10Y*
- —
USML
- 1D
- 0.60%
- 1M
- -4.40%
- YTD
- -0.53%
- 6M
- -1.84%
- 1Y
- 1.32%
- 3Y*
- 14.47%
- 5Y*
- 7.17%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFD vs. USML - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 5.55% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 18.88% |
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN | -0.53% | 9.33% | 23.97% | 11.37% | -22.87% | 42.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFD and USML is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.61 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CEFD and USML has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.61, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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. USML — Risk / Return Rank
CEFD
USML
CEFD vs. USML - 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 Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML). 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.
| CEFD | USML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.03 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.33 | 0.10 | +1.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.09 | 0.29 | +5.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEFD vs. USML - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFD drawdown since its inception was -36.95%, roughly equal to the maximum USML drawdown of -35.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFD and USML.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFD | USML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.95% | -35.34% | -1.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.51% | -13.09% | +0.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.76% | -19.14% | -2.62% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.95% | -35.34% | -1.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.80% | -6.96% | +5.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.63% | -10.36% | -1.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.72% | 4.50% | -1.78% |
Volatility
CEFD vs. USML - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) is 4.13%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) has a volatility of 4.79%. This indicates that CEFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFD | USML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.13% | 4.79% | -0.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.71% | 11.79% | -0.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.28% | 16.52% | -3.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.99% | 24.47% | -6.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.30% | 24.22% | -6.92% |
CEFD vs. USML - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CEFD and USML have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
CEFD vs. USML - Dividend Comparison
CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.84%, while USML 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 | 14.84% | 14.88% | 13.90% | 14.76% | 16.56% | 10.31% | 5.37% |
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFD and USML have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
USML has higher volatility (4.79%) compared to CEFD (4.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFD dropped -36.95% vs USML's -35.34%.
On 5-year performance, USML leads with 7.17% vs 2.85% for CEFD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, USML has performed better with a 7.17% return vs 2.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CEFD and USML have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.84%, compared with 0.00% for USML.
CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while USML tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index.
CEFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs 0.08), 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 USML
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