CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L).
CMOP.L and CMOD.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CMOP.L is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Commodity. It was launched on Jan 9, 2017. CMOD.L is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. It was launched on Aug 17, 2018. Both CMOP.L and CMOD.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMOP.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc | 23.96% | 8.23% | 6.01% | -12.72% | 28.44% | 28.71% | -7.11% | 3.31% | -5.01% | -5.69% |
CMOD.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF | 24.89% | 7.88% | 5.95% | -12.18% | 28.11% | 28.55% | -6.69% | 2.58% | -4.90% | -5.71% |
Different Trading Currencies
CMOP.L is traded in GBp, while CMOD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CMOD.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CMOP.L having a 23.96% return and CMOD.L slightly higher at 24.89%.
CMOP.L
- 1D
- -2.28%
- 1M
- 9.33%
- YTD
- 23.96%
- 6M
- 31.99%
- 1Y
- 26.66%
- 3Y*
- 10.51%
- 5Y*
- 14.17%
- 10Y*
- —
CMOD.L
- 1D
- -1.44%
- 1M
- 10.14%
- YTD
- 24.89%
- 6M
- 32.71%
- 1Y
- 27.22%
- 3Y*
- 10.60%
- 5Y*
- 14.29%
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CMOP.L and CMOD.L have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Return for Risk
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMOP.L
CMOD.L
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.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.
| CMOP.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.61 | 1.62 | -0.01 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.14 | 2.17 | -0.03 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.30 | 0.00 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.53 | 3.69 | -0.16 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.83 | 8.25 | -0.42 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CMOP.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.61 | 1.62 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 | 0.87 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.44 | 0.39 | +0.05 |
Correlation
The correlation between CMOP.L and CMOD.L is 0.92, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMOP.L nor CMOD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMOP.L drawdown since its inception was -28.78%, smaller than the maximum CMOD.L drawdown of -32.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMOP.L and CMOD.L.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMOP.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.78% | -33.16% | +4.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.41% | -8.95% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.78% | -26.86% | -1.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.28% | -1.22% | -1.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.35% | -12.47% | +0.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.44% | 3.10% | +0.34% |
Volatility
CMOP.L vs. CMOD.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) have volatilities of 8.33% and 8.25%, 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 graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CMOP.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.33% | 8.25% | +0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.37% | 13.72% | -0.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.53% | 16.77% | -0.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.12% | 16.45% | -0.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.88% | 15.20% | -0.32% |