CXAP.L vs. UC99.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CXAP.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and UC99.L (UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both exchange-traded funds - CXAP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped, while UC99.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CXAP.L returned 12.09%/yr vs 16.23%/yr for UC99.L. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CXAP.L charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for UC99.L.

Performance

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) and UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CXAP.L achieves a 26.29% return, which is significantly higher than UC99.L's 9.73% return. Over the past 10 years, CXAP.L has underperformed UC99.L with an annualized return of 12.09%, while UC99.L has yielded a comparatively higher 16.23% 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%

UC99.L

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 6.91%
• YTD: 9.73%
• 6M: 10.09%
• 1Y: 29.09%
• 3Y*: 17.64%
• 5Y*: 13.84%
• 10Y*: 16.23%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CXAP.L vs. UC99.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%
UC99.L UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	9.73%	8.68%	22.60%	27.58%	-15.03%	28.64%	16.43%	32.55%	0.49%	12.84%

Correlation

The correlation between CXAP.L and UC99.L is -0.05, 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	-0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2016	0.27

The correlation between CXAP.L and UC99.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.27 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CXAP.L	UC99.L
Technology	32.6%	54.7%
Industrials	14.6%	13.3%
Financial Services	12.6%	7.3%
Communication Services	10.6%	7.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	2.9%
Healthcare	6.4%	10.9%
Utilities	4.4%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	2.8%
Energy	2.9%	-
Basic Materials	1.4%	0.0%
Real Estate	0.2%	-

Return for Risk

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CXAP.L

CXAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CXAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
CXAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
CXAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CXAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 90

UC99.L

UC99.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
UC99.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
UC99.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
UC99.L Omega Ratio Rank: 71
UC99.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
UC99.L Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

CXAP.L vs. UC99.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 UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.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	UC99.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.89	2.38	+0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.31	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.43	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.82	3.06	+4.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.31	10.99	+9.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.89, which is comparable to the UC99.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CXAP.L and UC99.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CXAP.L	UC99.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.89	2.38	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91	0.86	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76	0.99	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	0.99	-0.23

Drawdowns

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CXAP.L drawdown since its inception was -31.30%, which is greater than UC99.L's maximum drawdown of -23.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CXAP.L and UC99.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CXAP.L	UC99.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.30%	-23.20%	-8.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.75%	-9.47%	+3.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.43%	-23.20%	+7.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.53%	-23.20%	+1.67%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.30%	-23.20%	-8.10%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.77%	-0.20%	-0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.24%	-4.24%	-4.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.22%	2.64%	-0.42%

Volatility

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) has a higher volatility of 4.57% compared to UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.L) at 3.35%. This indicates that CXAP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UC99.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CXAP.L	UC99.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	3.35%	+1.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.73%	8.61%	+4.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.57%	12.26%	+3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.18%	16.02%	+0.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.05%	16.55%	-0.50%

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CXAP.L has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than UC99.L's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CXAP.L vs. UC99.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CXAP.L nor UC99.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CXAP.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UC99.L UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CXAP.L and UC99.L in my portfolio?

CXAP.L and UC99.L have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CXAP.L or UC99.L?

On fees, UC99.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CXAP.L or UC99.L?

UC99.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for CXAP.L.

What is the main difference between CXAP.L and UC99.L?

CXAP.L is categorized as Commodities, while UC99.L is Large Cap Blend Equities. CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped, while UC99.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for CXAP.L and 0.25% for UC99.L.