PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) Sustainable Development Bank Bonds UCITS ETF (USD) Acc (MDBA.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc (CEMF.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MDBA.DE achieves a 1.20% return, which is significantly higher than CEMF.DE's -1.42% return.


MDBA.DE

1D
0.00%
1M
0.73%
YTD
1.20%
6M
0.67%
1Y
1.63%
3Y*
1.12%
5Y*
1.90%
10Y*

CEMF.DE

1D
0.28%
1M
-0.19%
YTD
-1.42%
6M
-1.51%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MDBA.DE and CEMF.DE is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2025

-0.09

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

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

MDBA.DE
MDBA.DE Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
MDBA.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MDBA.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
MDBA.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
MDBA.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
MDBA.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

CEMF.DE
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.

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Sustainable Development Bank Bonds UCITS ETF (USD) Acc (MDBA.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc (CEMF.DE). 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.


MDBA.DECEMF.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.43

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.04

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MDBA.DECEMF.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.24

0.29

-0.05

Drawdowns

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MDBA.DE drawdown since its inception was -12.17%, which is greater than CEMF.DE's maximum drawdown of -4.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MDBA.DE and CEMF.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MDBA.DECEMF.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.17%

-4.45%

-7.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.13%

-2.97%

-3.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.56%

-1.20%

-4.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.55%

Volatility

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MDBA.DECEMF.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.85%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.31%

4.62%

+0.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.26%

4.62%

+2.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.03%

4.62%

+2.41%

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

MDBA.DE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than CEMF.DE's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

MDBA.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither MDBA.DE nor CEMF.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MDBA.DE and CEMF.DE have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CEMF.DE is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CEMF.DE is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for MDBA.DE.

MDBA.DE tracks Solactive UBS Global Multilateral Development Bank Bond USD 25% Issuer Capped, while CEMF.DE tracks ICE US Treasury 7-10 Year (EUR Hedged) Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for MDBA.DE and 0.10% for CEMF.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MDBA.DE and CEMF.DE

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