CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L
CMOD.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF) and X7PP.L (Invesco European Banks Sector UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CMOD.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity TR Index, while X7PP.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CMOD.L returned 10.88%/yr vs 26.10%/yr for X7PP.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CMOD.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for X7PP.L.
Performance
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CMOD.L is traded in USD, while X7PP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the X7PP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMOD.L achieves a 24.60% return, which is significantly higher than X7PP.L's 4.95% return.
CMOD.L
- 1D
- -1.40%
- 1M
- -3.78%
- YTD
- 24.60%
- 6M
- 24.00%
- 1Y
- 37.37%
- 3Y*
- 15.36%
- 5Y*
- 10.88%
- 10Y*
- —
X7PP.L
- 1D
- 0.49%
- 1M
- 5.45%
- YTD
- 4.95%
- 6M
- 12.43%
- 1Y
- 41.85%
- 3Y*
- 46.54%
- 5Y*
- 26.10%
- 10Y*
- 14.08%
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMOD.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF | 24.60% | 16.16% | 4.13% | -7.56% | 14.50% | 27.35% | -3.87% | 6.64% | -10.22% | 0.08% |
X7PP.L Invesco European Banks Sector UCITS ETF | 4.95% | 101.94% | 24.95% | 29.78% | -5.30% | 27.99% | -16.01% | 12.68% | -29.67% | 23.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMOD.L and X7PP.L is -0.18, 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 | -0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2017 | 0.21 |
The correlation between CMOD.L and X7PP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
Basic Materials
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Financial Services
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
Consumer Cyclical
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Communication Services
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Consumer Defensive
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Real Estate
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Technology
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
-
Energy
CMOD.L
-
X7PP.L
-
Healthcare
CMOD.L
-
X7PP.L
-
Industrials
CMOD.L
-
X7PP.L
-
Utilities
CMOD.L
-
X7PP.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
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMOD.L
X7PP.L
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) and Invesco European Banks Sector UCITS ETF (X7PP.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.
| CMOD.L | X7PP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.30 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.10 | 2.30 | +2.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.82 | 7.31 | +4.51 |
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
| CMOD.L | X7PP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21 | 1.76 | +0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 | 0.99 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.51 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.30 | +0.17 |
Drawdowns
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMOD.L drawdown since its inception was -33.16%, smaller than the maximum X7PP.L drawdown of -62.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMOD.L and X7PP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMOD.L | X7PP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.16% | -62.74% | +29.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.30% | -18.12% | +10.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.66% | -19.96% | +8.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.86% | -38.99% | +12.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.50% | -3.60% | -1.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.29% | -22.28% | +9.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.15% | 5.71% | -2.56% |
Volatility
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) is 5.58%, while Invesco European Banks Sector UCITS ETF (X7PP.L) has a volatility of 6.89%. This indicates that CMOD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than X7PP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMOD.L | X7PP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.58% | 6.89% | -1.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.96% | 19.40% | -4.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.80% | 23.72% | -6.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.57% | 26.33% | -9.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.69% | 27.41% | -12.72% |
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMOD.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than X7PP.L's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
CMOD.L vs. X7PP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMOD.L nor X7PP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CMOD.L and X7PP.L have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CMOD.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMOD.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for X7PP.L.
CMOD.L is categorized as Commodities, while X7PP.L is Financials Equities. CMOD.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity TR Index, while X7PP.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CMOD.L and 0.20% for X7PP.L.
Find the right allocation for CMOD.L and X7PP.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