CMCI vs. NUSA
CMCI (VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF) and NUSA (Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CMCI is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Composite Total Return Index, while NUSA is a Short-Term Bond fund tracking the ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond (1-5 Y). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CMCI returned 28.88% vs 2.32% for NUSA. Their -0.16 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CMCI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for NUSA.
Performance
CMCI vs. NUSA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMCI achieves a 21.78% return, which is significantly higher than NUSA's 0.48% return.
CMCI
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 5.96%
- 6M
- 15.17%
- YTD
- 21.78%
- 1Y
- 28.88%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 10.77%
NUSA
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- -0.22%
- 6M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 0.48%
- 1Y
- 2.32%
- 3Y*
- 4.41%
- 5Y*
- 1.48%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.21%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.50K | $2.03K | $12.86K | |
| $94.86K | $115.11K | $125.22K |
CMCI vs. NUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF | 21.78% | 7.90% | 5.68% | -2.74% |
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 0.48% | 5.89% | 3.52% | 3.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMCI and NUSA is -0.30, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 23, 2023 | -0.16 |
The correlation between CMCI and NUSA shifts across timeframes, from -0.30 (1 year) to -0.16 (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
CMCI vs. NUSA — Risk / Return Rank
CMCI
NUSA
CMCI vs. NUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI) and Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA). 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.
| CMCI | NUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.31 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.57 | 2.27 | +0.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.12 | 7.31 | +1.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CMCI vs. NUSA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMCI drawdown since its inception was -11.54%, which is greater than NUSA's maximum drawdown of -9.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMCI and NUSA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMCI | NUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.54% | -9.44% | -2.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.77% | -1.28% | -9.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.62% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -9.43% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.08% | -0.46% | -3.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.69% | -1.63% | -2.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.04% | 0.40% | +2.64% |
Volatility
CMCI vs. NUSA - Volatility Comparison
VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF (CMCI) has a higher volatility of 3.80% compared to Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) at 0.51%. This indicates that CMCI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMCI | NUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.80% | 0.51% | +3.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.52% | 1.48% | +9.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.62% | 1.82% | +10.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.65% | 2.81% | +9.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.65% | 2.71% | +9.94% |
CMCI vs. NUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMCI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than NUSA's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMCI vs. NUSA - Dividend Comparison
CMCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.12%, more than NUSA's 3.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMCI VanEck CMCI Commodity Strategy ETF | 8.12% | 9.89% | 3.93% | 1.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 3.57% | 3.83% | 3.93% | 3.54% | 2.44% | 2.16% | 2.51% | 2.85% | 3.22% | 2.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CMCI and NUSA have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMCI has higher volatility (3.80%) compared to NUSA (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMCI dropped -11.54% vs NUSA's -9.44%.
On 1-year performance, CMCI leads with 28.88% vs 2.32% for NUSA. On fees, NUSA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, NUSA has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CMCI has performed better with a 28.88% return vs 2.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NUSA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMCI.
CMCI has the higher dividend yield at 8.12%, compared with 3.57% for NUSA.
CMCI is categorized as Commodities, while NUSA is Short-Term Bond. CMCI tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Composite Total Return Index, while NUSA tracks ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond (1-5 Y). They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Nuveen. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CMCI and 0.15% for NUSA.
CMCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.60), 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 CMCI and NUSA
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