PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ETRA.L vs. COMF.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G New Energy Commodities UCITS ETF USD Acc (ETRA.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ETRA.L is traded in GBp, while COMF.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the COMF.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ETRA.L achieves a 9.29% return, which is significantly lower than COMF.L's 14.74% return.


ETRA.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-1.63%
6M
1.76%
YTD
9.29%
1Y
28.20%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

COMF.L

1D
0.00%
1M
0.01%
6M
9.74%
YTD
14.74%
1Y
22.89%
3Y*
10.18%
5Y*
11.54%
10Y*
7.95%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
ETRA.L
L&G New Energy Commodities UCITS ETF USD Acc
9.29%19.38%-20.97%
COMF.L
L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF
14.74%8.14%-1.98%

Correlation

The correlation between ETRA.L and COMF.L is 0.62, 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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2024

0.60

The correlation between ETRA.L and COMF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ETRA.L
ETRA.L Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
ETRA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ETRA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
ETRA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
ETRA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
ETRA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

COMF.L
COMF.L Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
COMF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
COMF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
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.

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G New Energy Commodities UCITS ETF USD Acc (ETRA.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.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.


ETRA.LCOMF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.28

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.12

2.19

-1.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.11

6.78

-4.67

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ETRA.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the COMF.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ETRA.L and COMF.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...

Drawdowns

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ETRA.L drawdown since its inception was -26.76%, smaller than the maximum COMF.L drawdown of -50.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ETRA.L and COMF.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ETRA.LCOMF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.76%

-50.51%

+23.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.14%

-10.49%

-14.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.10%

-7.50%

-3.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.76%

-23.27%

+4.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.34%

3.39%

+9.95%

Volatility

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G New Energy Commodities UCITS ETF USD Acc (ETRA.L) has a higher volatility of 4.48% compared to L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (COMF.L) at 3.57%. This indicates that ETRA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COMF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ETRA.LCOMF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.48%

3.57%

+0.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.25%

12.14%

-0.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

43.84%

14.53%

+29.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.96%

15.17%

+17.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.96%

14.17%

+18.79%

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ETRA.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than COMF.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

ETRA.L vs. COMF.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ETRA.L nor COMF.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ETRA.L and COMF.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, COMF.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

COMF.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ETRA.L.

ETRA.L tracks Solactive Energy Transition Commodity Total Return Index, while COMF.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index 3 Month Forward Total Return. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ETRA.L and 0.30% for COMF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ETRA.L and COMF.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