CUT vs. WOOD
CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) and WOOD (iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF) are both Materials funds - CUT tracks the Beacon Global Timber Index while WOOD tracks the S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUT returned 3.95%/yr vs 5.43%/yr for WOOD. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CUT charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for WOOD.
Performance
CUT vs. WOOD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CUT achieves a -4.74% return, which is significantly higher than WOOD's -5.98% return. Over the past 10 years, CUT has underperformed WOOD with an annualized return of 3.95%, while WOOD has yielded a comparatively higher 5.43% annualized return.
CUT
- 1D
- -1.24%
- 1M
- -0.70%
- 6M
- -8.57%
- YTD
- -4.74%
- 1Y
- -8.82%
- 3Y*
- -0.71%
- 5Y*
- -3.71%
- 10Y*
- 3.95%
WOOD
- 1D
- -0.96%
- 1M
- -0.55%
- 6M
- -10.71%
- YTD
- -5.98%
- 1Y
- -8.35%
- 3Y*
- -1.55%
- 5Y*
- -3.59%
- 10Y*
- 5.43%
CUT vs. WOOD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | -4.74% | -5.92% | 1.82% | 8.65% | -16.38% | 12.29% | 18.05% | 23.35% | -21.70% | 30.41% |
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | -5.98% | -3.27% | -4.21% | 13.84% | -19.39% | 17.03% | 20.36% | 19.75% | -17.73% | 34.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between CUT and WOOD is 0.91, 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 | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008 | 0.91 |
The correlation between CUT and WOOD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
CUT vs. WOOD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CUT
WOOD
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Industrials
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
CUT
WOOD
Basic Materials
CUT
WOOD
Real Estate
CUT
WOOD
Industrials
CUT
WOOD
-
Financial Services
CUT
WOOD
-
Consumer Defensive
CUT
WOOD
-
Technology
CUT
WOOD
-
Communication Services
CUT
-
WOOD
-
Energy
CUT
-
WOOD
-
Healthcare
CUT
-
WOOD
-
Utilities
CUT
-
WOOD
-
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
CUT vs. WOOD — Risk / Return Rank
CUT
WOOD
CUT vs. WOOD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD). 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.
| CUT | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.45 | -0.39 | -0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.88 | -0.77 | -0.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CUT vs. WOOD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CUT drawdown since its inception was -70.03%, which is greater than WOOD's maximum drawdown of -63.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUT and WOOD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CUT | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.03% | -63.25% | -6.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.62% | -21.64% | +2.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.23% | -22.79% | +0.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.40% | -30.71% | +0.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.76% | -50.20% | +4.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.31% | -23.52% | +1.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.30% | -14.81% | -0.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.10% | 10.94% | -0.84% |
Volatility
CUT vs. WOOD - Volatility Comparison
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) has a higher volatility of 5.71% compared to iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) at 5.42%. This indicates that CUT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WOOD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CUT | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.71% | 5.42% | +0.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.70% | 14.55% | +0.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.75% | 18.71% | +0.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.57% | 19.74% | -1.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.05% | 21.71% | -1.66% |
CUT vs. WOOD - Expense Ratio Comparison
CUT has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than WOOD's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
CUT vs. WOOD - Dividend Comparison
CUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, more than WOOD's 2.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.58% | 2.46% | 3.05% | 2.44% | 2.58% | 1.57% | 1.65% | 2.67% | 3.43% | 1.57% | 2.08% | 1.52% |
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | 2.51% | 2.51% | 2.09% | 1.64% | 2.26% | 1.24% | 0.98% | 1.85% | 2.82% | 1.19% | 1.65% | 2.04% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, CUT and WOOD 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.
CUT has higher volatility (5.71%) compared to WOOD (5.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CUT dropped -70.03% vs WOOD's -63.25%.
On 10-year performance, WOOD leads with 5.43% vs 3.95% for CUT. On fees, WOOD is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, WOOD has been the lower-risk option at 5.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, WOOD has performed better with a 5.43% return vs 3.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
WOOD is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.
CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 2.51% for WOOD.
CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index, while WOOD tracks S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CUT and 0.46% for WOOD.
WOOD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.45 vs -0.47), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CUT and WOOD
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