CMFP.L vs. VB

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

CMFP.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) and VB (Vanguard Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CMFP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward, while VB is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMFP.L returned 8.57%/yr vs 12.45%/yr for VB. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CMFP.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VB.

Performance

CMFP.L vs. VB - 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 Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMFP.L achieves a 14.35% return, which is significantly lower than VB's 16.65% return. Over the past 10 years, CMFP.L has underperformed VB with an annualized return of 8.57%, while VB has yielded a comparatively higher 12.45% annualized return.

CMFP.L

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: -6.61%
• YTD: 14.35%
• 6M: 15.89%
• 1Y: 23.80%
• 3Y*: 9.26%
• 5Y*: 12.26%
• 10Y*: 8.57%

VB

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 5.18%
• YTD: 16.65%
• 6M: 14.76%
• 1Y: 33.29%
• 3Y*: 14.81%
• 5Y*: 8.27%
• 10Y*: 12.45%

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

CMFP.L vs. VB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	14.35%	8.49%	6.86%	-11.43%	32.79%	34.61%	-0.92%	3.99%	-3.16%	-6.17%
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF	16.65%	1.12%	16.17%	12.31%	-7.70%	18.69%	15.69%	22.49%	-3.97%	6.21%

Correlation

The correlation between CMFP.L and VB is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2010	0.23

The correlation between CMFP.L and VB shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CMFP.L vs. VB — 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: 52
CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CMFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
CMFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 48
CMFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
CMFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

VB

VB Risk / Return Rank: 69
VB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
VB Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
VB Omega Ratio Rank: 61
VB Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
VB Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. VB - 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 Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB). 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	VB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	2.15	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.10	2.92	-0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.38	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	4.59	-1.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.23	15.92	-7.68

CMFP.L vs. VB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the VB Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMFP.L and VB, 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. VB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMFP.L drawdown since its inception was -66.80%, which is greater than VB's maximum drawdown of -40.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMFP.L and VB.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMFP.L	VB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.80%	-40.62%	-26.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.53%	-7.29%	-0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.15%	-26.79%	+1.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	-26.79%	+1.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.15%	-35.31%	+10.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.06%	0.00%	-9.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.95%	-7.06%	-36.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.88%	2.10%	+0.78%

Volatility

CMFP.L vs. VB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) is 3.78%, while Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) has a volatility of 4.66%. This indicates that CMFP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMFP.L	VB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.78%	4.66%	-0.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.33%	11.35%	+0.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.90%	15.58%	-0.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.04%	19.38%	+0.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.84%	20.97%	-4.13%

CMFP.L vs. VB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMFP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than VB's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

CMFP.L vs. VB - Dividend Comparison

CMFP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF	1.17%	1.33%	1.30%	1.55%	1.59%	1.24%	1.14%	1.39%	1.67%	1.35%	1.50%	1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

CMFP.L and VB have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CMFP.L or VB?

On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CMFP.L or VB?

VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CMFP.L.

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

CMFP.L is categorized as Commodities, while VB is Small Cap Blend Equities. CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward, while VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CMFP.L and 0.05% for VB.