DCMT vs. UCIB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) and UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) are both Commodities funds. DCMT is actively managed, while UCIB is passively managed. Over the past year, DCMT returned 42.19% vs 29.68% for UCIB. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DCMT charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for UCIB.

Performance

DCMT vs. UCIB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DCMT achieves a 34.49% return, which is significantly higher than UCIB's 20.67% return.

DCMT

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -2.89%
• YTD: 34.49%
• 6M: 33.53%
• 1Y: 42.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UCIB

• 1D: -1.83%
• 1M: -5.93%
• YTD: 20.67%
• 6M: 21.76%
• 1Y: 29.68%
• 3Y*: 13.51%
• 5Y*: 11.77%
• 10Y*: 10.30%

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

DCMT vs. UCIB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	34.49%	6.04%	4.96%
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	20.67%	8.97%	5.90%

Correlation

The correlation between DCMT and UCIB is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.50

Over the past year, DCMT and UCIB have become more correlated (0.77) than their long-term average of 0.50, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

DCMT vs. UCIB — Risk / Return Rank

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

DCMT

DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 76
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 69
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

UCIB

UCIB Risk / Return Rank: 36
UCIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
UCIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
UCIB Omega Ratio Rank: 45
UCIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
UCIB Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

DCMT vs. UCIB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB). 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.

	DCMT	UCIB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	0.94	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	1.38	+1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.29	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.83	1.92	+4.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.31	6.55	+9.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DCMT vs. UCIB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DCMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is higher than the UCIB Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DCMT and UCIB, 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

	DCMT	UCIB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	0.94	+1.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.44	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.45	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.20	0.38	+0.83

Drawdowns

DCMT vs. UCIB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DCMT drawdown since its inception was -11.95%, smaller than the maximum UCIB drawdown of -36.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCMT and UCIB.

Drawdown Indicators

	DCMT	UCIB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.95%	-36.94%	+24.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.21%	-15.53%	+9.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.94%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.46%	-15.53%	+12.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.13%	-9.06%	+5.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.59%	4.54%	-1.95%

Volatility

DCMT vs. UCIB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) is 6.71%, while ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a volatility of 16.62%. This indicates that DCMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DCMT	UCIB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.71%	16.62%	-9.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.87%	31.05%	-15.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.27%	31.72%	-13.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.77%	26.74%	-10.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.77%	23.22%	-7.45%

DCMT vs. UCIB - Expense Ratio Comparison

DCMT has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than UCIB's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

DCMT vs. UCIB - Dividend Comparison

DCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.73%, while UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	2.73%	3.67%	1.59%
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DCMT and UCIB in my portfolio?

DCMT and UCIB have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DCMT or UCIB?

UCIB has higher volatility (16.62%) compared to DCMT (6.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCMT dropped -11.95% vs UCIB's -36.94%.

Which ETF is better, DCMT or UCIB?

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 42.19% vs 29.68% for UCIB. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, DCMT has been the lower-risk option at 6.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DCMT or UCIB?

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 42.19% return vs 29.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DCMT or UCIB?

UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DCMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DCMT or UCIB?

DCMT has the higher dividend yield at 2.73%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.

What is the main difference between DCMT and UCIB?

They also come from different issuers: DoubleLine and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DCMT and 0.55% for UCIB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DCMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 0.94), 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.