CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L
CMOP.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc) and CXAP.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both Commodities funds - CMOP.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity while CXAP.L tracks the UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CMOP.L returned 12.08%/yr vs 14.55%/yr for CXAP.L. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CMOP.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for CXAP.L.
Performance
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CMOP.L having a 24.84% return and CXAP.L slightly higher at 25.34%.
CMOP.L
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- -2.74%
- YTD
- 24.84%
- 6M
- 23.47%
- 1Y
- 38.91%
- 3Y*
- 12.42%
- 5Y*
- 12.08%
- 10Y*
- —
CXAP.L
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- 1.43%
- YTD
- 25.34%
- 6M
- 26.88%
- 1Y
- 44.84%
- 3Y*
- 14.83%
- 5Y*
- 14.55%
- 10Y*
- 11.86%
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMOP.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc | 24.84% | 8.23% | 6.01% | -12.72% | 28.44% | 28.71% | -7.11% | 3.31% | -5.01% | -5.69% |
CXAP.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | 25.34% | 10.65% | 8.67% | -10.60% | 27.69% | 36.79% | -4.93% | 7.15% | -6.02% | 4.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMOP.L and CXAP.L is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2017 | 0.85 |
The correlation between CMOP.L and CXAP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Technology
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Financial Services
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Consumer Cyclical
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Communication Services
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Consumer Defensive
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Real Estate
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Technology
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
Energy
CMOP.L
-
CXAP.L
Healthcare
CMOP.L
-
CXAP.L
Industrials
CMOP.L
-
CXAP.L
Utilities
CMOP.L
-
CXAP.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
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMOP.L
CXAP.L
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.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 UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.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 | CXAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.51 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.07 | 7.76 | -2.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.63 | 20.14 | -8.51 |
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
| CMOP.L | CXAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.10 | 2.87 | -0.76 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | 0.90 | -0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.74 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 0.76 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMOP.L drawdown since its inception was -28.78%, smaller than the maximum CXAP.L drawdown of -31.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMOP.L and CXAP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMOP.L | CXAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.78% | -31.30% | +2.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -5.75% | -1.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.89% | -15.43% | +0.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.78% | -21.53% | -7.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.30% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.98% | -1.52% | -3.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.18% | -8.23% | -3.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 2.22% | +1.12% |
Volatility
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) has a higher volatility of 6.19% compared to UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) at 4.37%. This indicates that CMOP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CXAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMOP.L | CXAP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.19% | 4.37% | +1.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.17% | 12.75% | +3.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.42% | 15.59% | +2.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 16.18% | +0.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.15% | 16.05% | -0.90% |
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMOP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than CXAP.L's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMOP.L vs. CXAP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMOP.L nor CXAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, CMOP.L and CXAP.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, CMOP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMOP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for CXAP.L.
CMOP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity, while CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CMOP.L and 0.34% for CXAP.L.
Find the right allocation for CMOP.L and CXAP.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