CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L
CXAP.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and CMFP.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) are both Commodities funds - CXAP.L tracks the UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped while CMFP.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CXAP.L returned 12.09%/yr vs 9.54%/yr for CMFP.L. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CXAP.L charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CMFP.L.
Performance
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CXAP.L achieves a 26.29% return, which is significantly higher than CMFP.L's 20.51% return. Over the past 10 years, CXAP.L has outperformed CMFP.L with an annualized return of 12.09%, while CMFP.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.54% annualized return.
CXAP.L
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 3.94%
- YTD
- 26.29%
- 6M
- 27.63%
- 1Y
- 45.18%
- 3Y*
- 15.50%
- 5Y*
- 14.72%
- 10Y*
- 12.09%
CMFP.L
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 1.45%
- YTD
- 20.51%
- 6M
- 19.70%
- 1Y
- 32.99%
- 3Y*
- 11.73%
- 5Y*
- 13.54%
- 10Y*
- 9.54%
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CXAP.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | 26.29% | 10.65% | 8.67% | -10.60% | 27.69% | 36.79% | -4.93% | 7.15% | -6.02% | 5.06% |
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF | 20.51% | 8.49% | 6.86% | -11.43% | 32.79% | 34.61% | -0.92% | 3.99% | -3.16% | -6.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between CXAP.L and CMFP.L 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 | 0.89 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2016 | 0.86 |
The correlation between CXAP.L and CMFP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Technology
Industrials
-
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Defensive
Energy
-
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Industrials
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
-
Financial Services
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Communication Services
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Consumer Cyclical
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Healthcare
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
-
Utilities
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
-
Consumer Defensive
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Energy
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
-
Basic Materials
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
Real Estate
CXAP.L
CMFP.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
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L — Risk / Return Rank
CXAP.L
CMFP.L
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.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.
| CXAP.L | CMFP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.40 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.82 | 4.96 | +2.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.31 | 12.17 | +8.14 |
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
| CXAP.L | CMFP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.89 | 2.24 | +0.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.76 | 0.68 | +0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.76 | 0.27 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CXAP.L drawdown since its inception was -31.30%, smaller than the maximum CMFP.L drawdown of -50.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CXAP.L and CMFP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CXAP.L | CMFP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.30% | -50.47% | +19.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.75% | -6.63% | +0.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.43% | -12.97% | -2.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.53% | -23.51% | +1.98% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.30% | -23.95% | -7.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.77% | -2.55% | +1.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.24% | -24.51% | +16.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.22% | 2.70% | -0.48% |
Volatility
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) is 4.57%, while L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) has a volatility of 4.92%. This indicates that CXAP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMFP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CXAP.L | CMFP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.57% | 4.92% | -0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.73% | 12.12% | +0.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.57% | 14.68% | +0.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.18% | 14.85% | +1.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.05% | 13.92% | +2.13% |
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CXAP.L has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than CMFP.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
CXAP.L vs. CMFP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CXAP.L nor CMFP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, CXAP.L and CMFP.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, CMFP.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMFP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for CXAP.L.
CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped, while CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for CXAP.L and 0.30% for CMFP.L.
Find the right allocation for CXAP.L and CMFP.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