CMFP.L vs. UC90.L
CMFP.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) and UC90.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc) are both Commodities funds - CMFP.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward while UC90.L tracks the UBS CMCI (GBP Hedged). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMFP.L returned 9.22%/yr vs 7.57%/yr for UC90.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CMFP.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for UC90.L.
Performance
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMFP.L achieves a 19.16% return, which is significantly lower than UC90.L's 21.40% return. Over the past 10 years, CMFP.L has outperformed UC90.L with an annualized return of 9.22%, while UC90.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.57% annualized 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%
UC90.L
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- -1.81%
- YTD
- 21.40%
- 6M
- 22.49%
- 1Y
- 30.42%
- 3Y*
- 12.90%
- 5Y*
- 10.87%
- 10Y*
- 7.57%
CMFP.L vs. UC90.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 | 19.16% | 8.49% | 6.86% | -11.43% | 32.79% | 34.61% | -0.92% | 3.99% | -3.16% | -6.17% |
UC90.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc | 21.40% | 9.58% | 4.52% | -2.02% | 14.86% | 33.21% | -1.26% | 5.91% | -11.85% | 5.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMFP.L and UC90.L is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 11, 2015 | 0.69 |
The correlation between CMFP.L and UC90.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (10 years) to 0.82 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Real Estate
-
Technology
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Consumer Defensive
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Financial Services
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Consumer Cyclical
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Communication Services
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Real Estate
CMFP.L
UC90.L
-
Technology
CMFP.L
UC90.L
Energy
CMFP.L
-
UC90.L
Healthcare
CMFP.L
-
UC90.L
Industrials
CMFP.L
-
UC90.L
Utilities
CMFP.L
-
UC90.L
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. UC90.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMFP.L
UC90.L
CMFP.L vs. UC90.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 UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc (UC90.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.L | UC90.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.44 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.81 | 6.33 | -1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.77 | 14.07 | -2.31 |
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
| CMFP.L | UC90.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.16 | 2.43 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 | 0.74 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.66 | 0.53 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.38 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMFP.L drawdown since its inception was -50.47%, which is greater than UC90.L's maximum drawdown of -41.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMFP.L and UC90.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMFP.L | UC90.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.47% | -41.45% | -9.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.63% | -4.79% | -1.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.97% | -11.47% | -1.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.51% | -19.19% | -4.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.95% | -38.26% | +14.31% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.64% | -4.67% | +1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.51% | -13.18% | -11.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 2.16% | +0.55% |
Volatility
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Volatility Comparison
L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc (UC90.L) have volatilities of 4.82% and 4.94%, 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.L | UC90.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.82% | 4.94% | -0.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.18% | 10.29% | +1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.73% | 12.48% | +2.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.86% | 14.75% | +0.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.92% | 14.23% | -0.31% |
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMFP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than UC90.L's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMFP.L vs. UC90.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMFP.L nor UC90.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CMFP.L and UC90.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CMFP.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMFP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for UC90.L.
CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward, while UC90.L tracks UBS CMCI (GBP Hedged). They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CMFP.L and 0.34% for UC90.L.
Find the right allocation for CMFP.L and UC90.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