PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CMFP.L vs. LDUK.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.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 Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions UK UCITS ETF (LDUK.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMFP.L achieves a 19.16% return, which is significantly higher than LDUK.L's 3.01% return.


CMFP.L

1D
-1.12%
1M
-1.18%
YTD
19.16%
6M
18.60%
1Y
32.00%
3Y*
10.92%
5Y*
13.29%
10Y*
9.22%

LDUK.L

1D
0.72%
1M
4.03%
YTD
3.01%
6M
7.64%
1Y
12.83%
3Y*
16.70%
5Y*
9.34%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CMFP.L
L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF
19.16%8.49%6.86%-11.43%32.79%23.16%
LDUK.L
L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions UK UCITS ETF
3.01%22.62%16.13%8.22%-3.33%6.07%

Correlation

The correlation between CMFP.L and LDUK.L is -0.27, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.27

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.08

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2021

-0.03

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between CMFP.L and LDUK.L has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.03 to -0.27, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CMFP.L
LDUK.L

Basic Materials

49.3%
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

13.6%
11.3%

Financial Services

10.7%
60.4%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
5.0%

Communication Services

7.6%
1.1%

Real Estate

5.5%

-

Technology

5.1%
0.1%

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

14.3%

Utilities

-

1.0%

Basic Materials

CMFP.L
49.3%
LDUK.L
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

CMFP.L
13.6%
LDUK.L
11.3%

Financial Services

CMFP.L
10.7%
LDUK.L
60.4%

Consumer Cyclical

CMFP.L
8.3%
LDUK.L
5.0%

Communication Services

CMFP.L
7.6%
LDUK.L
1.1%

Real Estate

CMFP.L
5.5%
LDUK.L

-

Technology

CMFP.L
5.1%
LDUK.L
0.1%

Energy

CMFP.L

-

LDUK.L

-

Healthcare

CMFP.L

-

LDUK.L

-

Industrials

CMFP.L

-

LDUK.L
14.3%

Utilities

CMFP.L

-

LDUK.L
1.0%

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

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.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: 6969
Overall Rank
CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

LDUK.L
LDUK.L Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
LDUK.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDUK.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDUK.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
LDUK.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDUK.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank
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. LDUK.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 Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions UK UCITS ETF (LDUK.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.


CMFP.LLDUK.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.16

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.81

1.11

+3.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.77

4.06

+7.71

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

The current CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the LDUK.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMFP.L and LDUK.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CMFP.LLDUK.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.16

0.87

+1.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

0.69

+0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.76

-0.49

Drawdowns

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMFP.L drawdown since its inception was -50.47%, which is greater than LDUK.L's maximum drawdown of -17.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMFP.L and LDUK.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CMFP.LLDUK.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.47%

-17.13%

-33.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.63%

-11.51%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.97%

-13.46%

+0.49%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.51%

-17.13%

-6.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.64%

-1.80%

-1.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.51%

-3.66%

-20.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.71%

3.15%

-0.44%

Volatility

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) and L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions UK UCITS ETF (LDUK.L) have volatilities of 4.82% and 4.63%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CMFP.LLDUK.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.82%

4.63%

+0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.18%

12.32%

-0.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.73%

14.67%

+0.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.86%

15.61%

-0.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.92%

15.64%

-1.72%

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

CMFP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than LDUK.L's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

CMFP.L vs. LDUK.L - Dividend Comparison

CMFP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDUK.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.79%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CMFP.L
L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LDUK.L
L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions UK UCITS ETF
4.79%4.87%4.43%5.14%5.87%4.41%

Frequently Asked Questions


CMFP.L and LDUK.L have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LDUK.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LDUK.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CMFP.L.

CMFP.L is categorized as Commodities, while LDUK.L is Europe Equities. CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward, while LDUK.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CMFP.L and 0.25% for LDUK.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CMFP.L and LDUK.L

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