CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L
CMOP.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc) and XLKQ.L (Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CMOP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity, while XLKQ.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CMOP.L returned 12.08%/yr vs 26.60%/yr for XLKQ.L. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CMOP.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLKQ.L.
Performance
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CMOP.L having a 24.84% return and XLKQ.L slightly lower at 23.81%.
CMOP.L
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- -2.74%
- YTD
- 24.84%
- 6M
- 23.47%
- 1Y
- 38.91%
- 3Y*
- 12.42%
- 5Y*
- 12.08%
- 10Y*
- —
XLKQ.L
- 1D
- -2.23%
- 1M
- 14.41%
- YTD
- 23.81%
- 6M
- 22.31%
- 1Y
- 54.52%
- 3Y*
- 33.18%
- 5Y*
- 26.60%
- 10Y*
- 27.22%
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.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% |
XLKQ.L Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc | 23.81% | 15.76% | 44.03% | 51.84% | -20.58% | 36.28% | 37.93% | 44.63% | 0.92% | 14.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMOP.L and XLKQ.L is -0.04, 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 | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2017 | 0.16 |
The correlation between CMOP.L and XLKQ.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.16 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
Basic Materials
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
-
Financial Services
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
Consumer Cyclical
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
-
Communication Services
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
-
Consumer Defensive
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
-
Real Estate
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
-
Technology
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
Energy
CMOP.L
-
XLKQ.L
-
Healthcare
CMOP.L
-
XLKQ.L
-
Industrials
CMOP.L
-
XLKQ.L
Utilities
CMOP.L
-
XLKQ.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. XLKQ.L — Risk / Return Rank
CMOP.L
XLKQ.L
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.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 Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.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 | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.46 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.07 | 3.24 | +1.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.63 | 8.42 | +3.21 |
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 | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.10 | 2.83 | -0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | 1.21 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.33 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 1.33 | -0.90 |
Drawdowns
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMOP.L drawdown since its inception was -28.78%, roughly equal to the maximum XLKQ.L drawdown of -28.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMOP.L and XLKQ.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMOP.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.78% | -28.74% | -0.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -16.76% | +9.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.89% | -28.74% | +13.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.78% | -28.74% | -0.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -28.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.98% | -2.84% | -2.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.18% | -5.04% | -7.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 6.45% | -3.11% |
Volatility
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) is 6.19%, while Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) has a volatility of 6.83%. This indicates that CMOP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLKQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMOP.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.19% | 6.83% | -0.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.17% | 14.29% | +1.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.42% | 19.18% | -0.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 22.04% | -5.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.15% | 21.65% | -6.50% |
CMOP.L vs. XLKQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMOP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than XLKQ.L's 0.14% 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. XLKQ.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CMOP.L nor XLKQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CMOP.L and XLKQ.L have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLKQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLKQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for CMOP.L.
CMOP.L is categorized as Commodities, while XLKQ.L is Technology Equities. CMOP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity, while XLKQ.L tracks S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CMOP.L and 0.14% for XLKQ.L.
Find the right allocation for CMOP.L and XLKQ.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