PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CXAP.L vs. XDBG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.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 Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CXAP.L achieves a 26.29% return, which is significantly higher than XDBG.L's 23.55% return. Over the past 10 years, CXAP.L has outperformed XDBG.L with an annualized return of 12.09%, while XDBG.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.76% 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%

XDBG.L

1D
-0.09%
1M
1.86%
YTD
23.55%
6M
26.11%
1Y
45.42%
3Y*
19.29%
5Y*
14.47%
10Y*
8.76%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
XDBG.L
Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged
23.55%25.68%8.15%-11.18%18.13%38.25%-3.17%5.10%-12.92%4.24%

Correlation

The correlation between CXAP.L and XDBG.L is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.80

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

0.78

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2016

0.72

The correlation between CXAP.L and XDBG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

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


Sectors
CXAP.L
XDBG.L

Technology

32.6%
36.3%

Industrials

14.6%
10.6%

Financial Services

12.6%
5.2%

Communication Services

10.6%
17.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
4.9%

Healthcare

6.4%
4.0%

Utilities

4.4%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
11.8%

Energy

2.9%
3.1%

Basic Materials

1.4%
4.0%

Real Estate

0.2%
2.8%

Technology

CXAP.L
32.6%
XDBG.L
36.3%

Industrials

CXAP.L
14.6%
XDBG.L
10.6%

Financial Services

CXAP.L
12.6%
XDBG.L
5.2%

Communication Services

CXAP.L
10.6%
XDBG.L
17.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CXAP.L
10.6%
XDBG.L
4.9%

Healthcare

CXAP.L
6.4%
XDBG.L
4.0%

Utilities

CXAP.L
4.4%
XDBG.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

CXAP.L
3.9%
XDBG.L
11.8%

Energy

CXAP.L
2.9%
XDBG.L
3.1%

Basic Materials

CXAP.L
1.4%
XDBG.L
4.0%

Real Estate

CXAP.L
0.2%
XDBG.L
2.8%

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. XDBG.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: 8888
Overall Rank
CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

XDBG.L
XDBG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
XDBG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.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 Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.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.LXDBG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.46

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.82

4.83

+2.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.31

13.57

+6.74

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

The current CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.89, which is comparable to the XDBG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CXAP.L and XDBG.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CXAP.LXDBG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.89

2.55

+0.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

0.76

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

0.55

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.76

0.08

+0.68

Drawdowns

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CXAP.L drawdown since its inception was -31.30%, smaller than the maximum XDBG.L drawdown of -64.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CXAP.L and XDBG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CXAP.LXDBG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.30%

-64.69%

+33.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.75%

-9.36%

+3.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.43%

-13.02%

-2.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.53%

-28.67%

+7.14%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.30%

-37.06%

+5.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.77%

-2.37%

+1.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.24%

-35.23%

+26.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.22%

3.34%

-1.12%

Volatility

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.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 Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.L) at 4.29%. This indicates that CXAP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDBG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CXAP.LXDBG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.57%

4.29%

+0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.73%

15.17%

-2.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.57%

17.75%

-2.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.18%

18.96%

-2.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.05%

16.01%

+0.04%

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

CXAP.L has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than XDBG.L's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

CXAP.L vs. XDBG.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CXAP.L and XDBG.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CXAP.L is cheaper at 0.34% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CXAP.L is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for XDBG.L.

CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped, while XDBG.L tracks Bloomberg ex-Agriculture and Livestock 15/30 Capped 3 Month Forward (GBP Hedged). They also come from different issuers: UBS and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for CXAP.L and 0.39% for XDBG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CXAP.L and XDBG.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