UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UBTS.L (UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and CMOP.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - UBTS.L is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while CMOP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UBTS.L returned 3.32%/yr vs 12.08%/yr for CMOP.L. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UBTS.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for CMOP.L.

Performance

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UBTS.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UBTS.L achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly lower than CMOP.L's 24.84% return.

UBTS.L

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: 1.80%
• 6M: 0.83%
• 1Y: 5.77%
• 3Y*: 2.02%
• 5Y*: 3.32%
• 10Y*: —

CMOP.L

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: -2.74%
• YTD: 24.84%
• 6M: 23.47%
• 1Y: 38.91%
• 3Y*: 12.42%
• 5Y*: 12.08%
• 10Y*: —

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

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UBTS.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	1.80%	-0.11%	4.95%	-1.59%	3.39%	6.97%	4.62%	3.52%	5.25%	-7.62%
CMOP.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc	24.84%	8.23%	6.01%	-12.72%	28.44%	28.71%	-7.11%	3.31%	-5.01%	-5.69%

Correlation

The correlation between UBTS.L and CMOP.L is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2017	0.34

Return for Risk

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

UBTS.L

UBTS.L Risk / Return Rank: 25
UBTS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
UBTS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
UBTS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 24
UBTS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
UBTS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 24

CMOP.L

CMOP.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
CMOP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CMOP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
CMOP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CMOP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UBTS.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.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.

	UBTS.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.91	2.10	-1.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	2.58	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.39	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.15	5.07	-3.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.08	11.63	-8.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UBTS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.91, which is lower than the CMOP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UBTS.L and CMOP.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

	UBTS.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91	2.10	-1.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	0.73	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.27	0.43	-0.16

Drawdowns

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UBTS.L drawdown since its inception was -15.99%, smaller than the maximum CMOP.L drawdown of -28.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UBTS.L and CMOP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	UBTS.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.99%	-28.78%	+12.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.97%	-7.63%	+2.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.52%	-14.89%	+7.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.99%	-28.78%	+12.79%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.74%	-4.98%	-0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.89%	-12.18%	+5.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.87%	3.34%	-1.47%

Volatility

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UBTS.L) is 1.78%, while Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc (CMOP.L) has a volatility of 6.19%. This indicates that UBTS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMOP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UBTS.L	CMOP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.78%	6.19%	-4.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.63%	16.17%	-11.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.29%	18.42%	-12.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.15%	16.59%	-8.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.68%	15.15%	-6.47%

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UBTS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CMOP.L's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

UBTS.L vs. CMOP.L - Dividend Comparison

UBTS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.01%, while CMOP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CMOP.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UBTS.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg TIPS 1-10 UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	4.01%	3.26%	4.42%	4.57%	6.66%	2.83%	0.84%	2.30%	2.38%	1.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UBTS.L and CMOP.L in my portfolio?

UBTS.L and CMOP.L have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, UBTS.L or CMOP.L?

On fees, UBTS.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, UBTS.L or CMOP.L?

UBTS.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for CMOP.L.

What is the main difference between UBTS.L and CMOP.L?

UBTS.L is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while CMOP.L is Commodities. UBTS.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while CMOP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for UBTS.L and 0.19% for CMOP.L.