IMID.L vs. UC15.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI) and UC15.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both exchange-traded funds - IMID.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while UC15.L is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS CMCI. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMID.L returned 10.97%/yr vs 11.83%/yr for UC15.L. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IMID.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for UC15.L.

Performance

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

IMID.L is traded in USD, while UC15.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the UC15.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMID.L achieves a 12.31% return, which is significantly lower than UC15.L's 22.57% return.

IMID.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 12.31%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 30.66%
• 3Y*: 20.84%
• 5Y*: 10.97%
• 10Y*: —

UC15.L

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 1.47%
• YTD: 22.57%
• 6M: 23.56%
• 1Y: 32.55%
• 3Y*: 14.02%
• 5Y*: 11.83%
• 10Y*: 9.13%

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

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	12.31%	22.16%	16.31%	21.65%	-17.64%	17.85%	16.14%	25.35%	-9.90%
UC15.L UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	22.57%	10.31%	4.66%	-1.58%	16.07%	34.87%	0.50%	9.54%	-14.60%

Correlation

The correlation between IMID.L and UC15.L is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.07
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2018	0.27

The correlation between IMID.L and UC15.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to 0.27 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMID.L	UC15.L
Industrials	19.5%	6.6%
Financial Services	13.0%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	7.3%
Consumer Defensive	9.7%	3.7%
Healthcare	9.6%	9.8%
Technology	9.6%	31.0%
Basic Materials	8.2%	0.5%
Real Estate	8.0%	-
Utilities	3.3%	1.1%
Communication Services	3.1%	15.0%
Energy	1.6%	14.2%

Return for Risk

IMID.L vs. UC15.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMID.L

IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 74
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

UC15.L

UC15.L Risk / Return Rank: 72
UC15.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
UC15.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
UC15.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
UC15.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
UC15.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.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.

	IMID.L	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.27	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	2.99	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.41	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	6.64	-3.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.47	14.87	-0.40
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMID.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the UC15.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMID.L and UC15.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

	IMID.L	UC15.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.27	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.79	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.27	+0.30

Drawdowns

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMID.L drawdown since its inception was -39.56%, smaller than the maximum UC15.L drawdown of -51.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMID.L and UC15.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMID.L	UC15.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.56%	-51.79%	+12.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.69%	-4.88%	-3.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.21%	-11.19%	-6.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.07%	-18.05%	-8.02%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-2.89%	+2.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.40%	-20.55%	+15.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.11%	2.18%	-0.07%

Volatility

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) is 4.04%, while UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UC15.L) has a volatility of 5.13%. This indicates that IMID.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UC15.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMID.L	UC15.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	5.13%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.94%	11.89%	-1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.62%	14.26%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.54%	15.02%	+0.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.23%	14.62%	+6.61%

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMID.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than UC15.L's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMID.L vs. UC15.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IMID.L nor UC15.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMID.L and UC15.L in my portfolio?

IMID.L and UC15.L have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IMID.L or UC15.L?

On fees, UC15.L is cheaper at 0.34% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMID.L or UC15.L?

UC15.L is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IMID.L.

What is the main difference between IMID.L and UC15.L?

IMID.L is categorized as Global Equities, while UC15.L is Commodities. IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while UC15.L tracks UBS CMCI. They also come from different issuers: State Street and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IMID.L and 0.34% for UC15.L.