PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) and iShares USD Treasury Bond 20+yr UCITS ETF (Dist) (IBTL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMOP.L achieves a 19.51% return, which is significantly higher than IBTL.L's -0.34% return.


CMOP.L

1D
-1.53%
1M
-7.51%
YTD
19.51%
6M
20.29%
1Y
29.45%
3Y*
11.03%
5Y*
10.87%
10Y*

IBTL.L

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.43%
YTD
-0.34%
6M
0.20%
1Y
5.42%
3Y*
-3.32%
5Y*
-5.44%
10Y*
-1.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CMOP.L
Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc
19.51%8.23%6.01%-12.72%28.44%28.71%-7.11%1.37%-3.26%-24.46%
IBTL.L
iShares USD Treasury Bond 20+yr UCITS ETF (Dist)
-0.34%-2.80%-5.51%-3.61%-22.17%-3.32%13.06%12.05%3.88%-2.35%

Correlation

The correlation between CMOP.L and IBTL.L is -0.10, 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

-0.10

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.03

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 9, 2017

0.03

The correlation between CMOP.L and IBTL.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. IBTL.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CMOP.L
CMOP.L Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMOP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMOP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
CMOP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMOP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

IBTL.L
IBTL.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
IBTL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBTL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBTL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
IBTL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBTL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.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 iShares USD Treasury Bond 20+yr UCITS ETF (Dist) (IBTL.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.

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.


CMOP.LIBTL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.09

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.46

0.58

+2.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.86

1.23

+7.64

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is higher than the IBTL.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMOP.L and IBTL.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMOP.L drawdown since its inception was -44.21%, smaller than the maximum IBTL.L drawdown of -48.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMOP.L and IBTL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CMOP.LIBTL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.21%

-48.85%

+4.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.03%

-8.26%

-0.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.87%

-17.10%

-9.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.78%

-39.34%

+10.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.03%

-45.09%

+36.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.89%

-22.69%

+0.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

3.91%

-0.38%

Volatility

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) has a higher volatility of 4.89% compared to iShares USD Treasury Bond 20+yr UCITS ETF (Dist) (IBTL.L) at 2.35%. This indicates that CMOP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBTL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CMOP.LIBTL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.89%

2.35%

+2.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.30%

6.40%

+9.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.62%

9.51%

+9.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.30%

15.47%

+5.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.02%

16.31%

+2.71%

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMOP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IBTL.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

CMOP.L vs. IBTL.L - Dividend Comparison

CMOP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBTL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CMOP.L
Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IBTL.L
iShares USD Treasury Bond 20+yr UCITS ETF (Dist)
2.27%4.31%4.58%3.79%2.96%1.72%1.86%2.54%2.75%2.68%2.45%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


CMOP.L and IBTL.L have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IBTL.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IBTL.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for CMOP.L.

CMOP.L is categorized as Commodities, while IBTL.L is Government Bonds. CMOP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity, while IBTL.L tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CMOP.L and 0.07% for IBTL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CMOP.L and IBTL.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