PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CUT vs. XME
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CUT vs. XME - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUT achieves a -5.58% return, which is significantly lower than XME's 24.13% return. Over the past 10 years, CUT has underperformed XME with an annualized return of 3.93%, while XME has yielded a comparatively higher 20.21% annualized return.


CUT

1D
0.52%
1M
0.52%
YTD
-5.58%
6M
-2.56%
1Y
-7.17%
3Y*
0.54%
5Y*
-4.30%
10Y*
3.93%

XME

1D
-3.24%
1M
9.89%
YTD
24.13%
6M
29.19%
1Y
103.84%
3Y*
40.26%
5Y*
23.59%
10Y*
20.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CUT vs. XME - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CUT
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF
-5.58%-5.92%1.82%8.65%-16.38%12.29%18.05%23.35%-21.70%30.41%
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
24.13%83.47%-4.54%21.51%13.13%34.92%15.95%14.69%-26.78%21.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CUT and XME is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

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

0.52

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

0.60

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2007

0.64

Over the past year, the correlation between CUT and XME has dropped to 0.41 - well below their long-term average of 0.64, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CUT vs. XME - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CUT
XME

Basic Materials

51.8%
75.3%

Consumer Cyclical

39.1%

-

Industrials

5.1%
0.4%

Real Estate

4.5%

-

Consumer Defensive

0.2%
0.8%

Financial Services

0.1%

-

Technology

0.1%
2.2%

Communication Services

-

-

Energy

-

23.4%

Healthcare

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

CUT
51.8%
XME
75.3%

Consumer Cyclical

CUT
39.1%
XME

-

Industrials

CUT
5.1%
XME
0.4%

Real Estate

CUT
4.5%
XME

-

Consumer Defensive

CUT
0.2%
XME
0.8%

Financial Services

CUT
0.1%
XME

-

Technology

CUT
0.1%
XME
2.2%

Communication Services

CUT

-

XME

-

Energy

CUT

-

XME
23.4%

Healthcare

CUT

-

XME

-

Utilities

CUT

-

XME

-

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. XME — Risk / Return Rank

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

CUT
CUT Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
CUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUT Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
CUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUT Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

XME
XME Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
XME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XME Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
XME Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
XME Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
XME Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

CUT vs. XME - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) and SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME). 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.


CUTXMEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.44

-0.49

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.37

4.62

-4.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.81

11.75

-12.56

CUT vs. XME - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUT Sharpe Ratio is -0.39, which is lower than the XME Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUT and XME, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CUTXMEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.39

3.02

-3.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.23

0.73

-0.96

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.62

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.18

-0.06

Drawdowns

CUT vs. XME - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUT drawdown since its inception was -70.03%, smaller than the maximum XME drawdown of -85.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUT and XME.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CUTXMEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-70.03%

-85.89%

+15.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.62%

-22.60%

+2.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.23%

-30.47%

+8.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.40%

-37.27%

+6.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.76%

-61.69%

+15.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-22.99%

-3.24%

-19.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.26%

-44.14%

+28.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.88%

8.87%

+0.01%

Volatility

CUT vs. XME - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) is 5.90%, while SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) has a volatility of 12.42%. This indicates that CUT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XME based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CUTXMEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.90%

12.42%

-6.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.05%

26.73%

-12.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.57%

34.65%

-16.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.48%

32.54%

-14.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.22%

32.84%

-12.62%

CUT vs. XME - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUT has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than XME's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

CUT vs. XME - Dividend Comparison

CUT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, more than XME's 0.30% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CUT
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF
2.61%2.46%3.05%2.44%2.58%1.57%1.65%2.67%3.43%1.57%2.08%1.52%
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
0.30%0.38%0.65%1.00%1.64%0.70%0.99%2.43%2.23%1.15%1.02%2.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


CUT and XME have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XME has higher volatility (12.42%) compared to CUT (5.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CUT dropped -70.03% vs XME's -85.89%.

On 10-year performance, XME leads with 20.21% vs 3.93% for CUT. On fees, XME is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CUT has been the lower-risk option at 5.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XME has performed better with a 20.21% return vs 3.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XME is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.

CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 0.30% for XME.

CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index, while XME tracks S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CUT and 0.35% for XME.

XME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs -0.39), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUT and XME

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