ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

ENCO.L (L&G Multi-Strategy Enhanced Commodities UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CMOD.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF) are both Commodities funds - ENCO.L tracks the Barclays Backwardation Tilt Multi-Strategy Capped Total Return Index while CMOD.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ENCO.L returned 9.76%/yr vs 12.45%/yr for CMOD.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ENCO.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for CMOD.L.

Performance

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Multi-Strategy Enhanced Commodities UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ENCO.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ENCO.L having a 20.59% return and CMOD.L slightly higher at 21.13%.

ENCO.L

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 2.32%
• 6M: 16.85%
• YTD: 20.59%
• 1Y: 24.66%
• 3Y*: 9.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CMOD.L

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 2.60%
• 6M: 17.36%
• YTD: 21.13%
• 1Y: 30.39%
• 3Y*: 12.45%
• 5Y*: 10.21%
• 10Y*: —

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

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ENCO.L L&G Multi-Strategy Enhanced Commodities UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	20.59%	8.38%	3.59%	-2.45%	23.37%	9.08%
CMOD.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF	21.13%	16.16%	4.12%	-7.56%	14.50%	3.58%

Correlation

The correlation between ENCO.L and CMOD.L is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2021	0.89

The correlation between ENCO.L and CMOD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENCO.L

ENCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 57
ENCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
ENCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
ENCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 60
ENCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
ENCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 50

CMOD.L

CMOD.L Risk / Return Rank: 61
CMOD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CMOD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CMOD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 69
CMOD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CMOD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Multi-Strategy Enhanced Commodities UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ENCO.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ENCO.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	1.78	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.29	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.32	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	2.10	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.33	6.63	-0.31

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENCO.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the CMOD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENCO.L and CMOD.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.

Drawdowns

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENCO.L drawdown since its inception was -23.99%, smaller than the maximum CMOD.L drawdown of -33.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENCO.L and CMOD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENCO.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.99%	-33.16%	+9.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.95%	-14.44%	+1.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.95%	-14.44%	+1.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.99%	-8.14%	+1.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.39%	-12.24%	-0.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.89%	4.53%	-0.64%

Volatility

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Multi-Strategy Enhanced Commodities UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ENCO.L) is 3.93%, while Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) has a volatility of 4.28%. This indicates that ENCO.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMOD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENCO.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.93%	4.28%	-0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.01%	15.06%	-2.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	17.04%	-1.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.23%	16.57%	+0.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.23%	14.68%	+2.55%

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENCO.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than CMOD.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ENCO.L vs. CMOD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ENCO.L nor CMOD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ENCO.L and CMOD.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, ENCO.L and CMOD.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.

Which ETF is better, ENCO.L or CMOD.L?

On fees, CMOD.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ENCO.L or CMOD.L?

CMOD.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ENCO.L.

What is the main difference between ENCO.L and CMOD.L?

ENCO.L tracks Barclays Backwardation Tilt Multi-Strategy Capped Total Return Index, while CMOD.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. They also come from different issuers: L&G and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ENCO.L and 0.19% for CMOD.L.