CMFP.L vs. COMF.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

CMFP.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) and COMF.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) are both Commodities funds - CMFP.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward while COMF.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Index 3 Month Forward Total Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMFP.L returned 7.89%/yr vs 7.95%/yr for COMF.L. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.30% expense ratio.

Performance

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CMFP.L is traded in GBp, while COMF.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the COMF.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CMFP.L having a 14.97% return and COMF.L slightly lower at 14.74%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CMFP.L having a 7.89% annualized return and COMF.L not far ahead at 7.95%.

CMFP.L

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 0.54%
• 6M: 10.31%
• YTD: 14.97%
• 1Y: 23.33%
• 3Y*: 10.24%
• 5Y*: 11.64%
• 10Y*: 7.89%

COMF.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.01%
• 6M: 9.74%
• YTD: 14.74%
• 1Y: 22.89%
• 3Y*: 10.18%
• 5Y*: 11.54%
• 10Y*: 7.95%

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

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	14.97%	8.49%	6.86%	-11.43%	32.79%	34.61%	-0.92%	3.99%	-3.16%	-6.17%
COMF.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	14.74%	8.14%	6.96%	-11.05%	32.85%	34.22%	-0.49%	3.28%	-3.00%	-5.81%

Correlation

The correlation between CMFP.L and COMF.L is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2010	0.90

The correlation between CMFP.L and COMF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CMFP.L

CMFP.L Risk / Return Rank: 55
CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
CMFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
CMFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
CMFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CMFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 52

COMF.L

COMF.L Risk / Return Rank: 58
COMF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
COMF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
COMF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
COMF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
COMF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.L). 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.

	CMFP.L	COMF.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	1.58	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.10	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.28	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.22	2.19	+0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.12	6.78	+0.34

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is comparable to the COMF.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMFP.L and COMF.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMFP.L drawdown since its inception was -66.80%, which is greater than COMF.L's maximum drawdown of -50.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMFP.L and COMF.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMFP.L	COMF.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.80%	-50.51%	-16.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.45%	-10.49%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.15%	-13.06%	-12.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	-23.88%	-1.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.15%	-23.97%	-1.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.56%	-7.50%	-1.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.77%	-23.27%	-20.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	3.39%	-0.12%

Volatility

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.L) have volatilities of 3.60% and 3.57%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMFP.L	COMF.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.60%	3.57%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.13%	12.14%	-0.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.44%	14.53%	-0.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.00%	15.17%	+4.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.67%	14.17%	+2.50%

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CMFP.L and COMF.L have an expense ratio of 0.30%.

Dividends

CMFP.L vs. COMF.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CMFP.L nor COMF.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CMFP.L and COMF.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, CMFP.L and COMF.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, CMFP.L or COMF.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.30% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CMFP.L or COMF.L?

CMFP.L and COMF.L have the same expense ratio: 0.30% per year.

What is the main difference between CMFP.L and COMF.L?

CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward, while COMF.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index 3 Month Forward Total Return. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and L&G.