MTUL vs. CEFD
MTUL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN) and CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MTUL is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Index, while CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MTUL returned 19.95%/yr vs 3.13%/yr for CEFD. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
MTUL vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MTUL achieves a 60.22% return, which is significantly higher than CEFD's 6.26% return.
MTUL
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 27.97%
- YTD
- 60.22%
- 6M
- 59.66%
- 1Y
- 75.85%
- 3Y*
- 59.49%
- 5Y*
- 19.95%
- 10Y*
- —
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 15.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.13%
- 10Y*
- —
MTUL vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 60.22% | 27.42% | 58.70% | 10.66% | -37.97% | 7.00% |
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 6.26% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 18.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between MTUL and CEFD is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021 | 0.68 |
The correlation between MTUL and CEFD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.68 - 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
MTUL vs. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank
MTUL
CEFD
MTUL vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). 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.
| MTUL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.29 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | 1.47 | +1.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.78 | 6.84 | +5.94 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MTUL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.73 | 1.43 | +0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.18 | +0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 0.52 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
MTUL vs. CEFD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MTUL drawdown since its inception was -56.83%, which is greater than CEFD's maximum drawdown of -36.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTUL and CEFD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MTUL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.83% | -36.95% | -19.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.86% | -12.51% | -11.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -39.15% | -21.76% | -17.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.83% | -36.95% | -19.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -1.14% | +0.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.68% | -11.72% | -10.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.96% | 2.68% | +3.28% |
Volatility
MTUL vs. CEFD - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a higher volatility of 20.29% compared to ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) at 4.05%. This indicates that MTUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MTUL | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 20.29% | 4.05% | +16.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.63% | 11.27% | +26.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.98% | 12.86% | +31.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.81% | 17.93% | +24.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.65% | 17.31% | +26.34% |
MTUL vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both MTUL and CEFD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
MTUL vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison
MTUL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 14.58% | 14.88% | 13.90% | 14.76% | 16.56% | 10.31% | 5.37% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MTUL and CEFD have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUL has higher volatility (20.29%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MTUL dropped -56.83% vs CEFD's -36.95%.
On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 19.95% vs 3.13% for CEFD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 19.95% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MTUL and CEFD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for MTUL.
MTUL tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index, while CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%).
MTUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.43), 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.
Find the right allocation for MTUL and CEFD
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