PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
UC90.L vs. CXAP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UC90.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc) and CXAP.L (UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both Commodities funds from UBS - UC90.L tracks the UBS CMCI (GBP Hedged) while CXAP.L tracks the UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UC90.L returned 7.57%/yr vs 11.86%/yr for CXAP.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.34% expense ratio.

Performance

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc (UC90.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UC90.L achieves a 21.40% return, which is significantly lower than CXAP.L's 25.34% return. Over the past 10 years, UC90.L has underperformed CXAP.L with an annualized return of 7.57%, while CXAP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 11.86% annualized return.

UC90.L

1D
-1.30%
1M
-1.81%
YTD
21.40%
6M
22.49%
1Y
30.42%
3Y*
12.90%
5Y*
10.87%
10Y*
7.57%

CXAP.L

1D
-0.75%
1M
1.43%
YTD
25.34%
6M
26.88%
1Y
44.84%
3Y*
14.83%
5Y*
14.55%
10Y*
11.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UC90.L
UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc		21.40%9.58%4.52%-2.02%14.86%33.21%-1.26%5.91%-11.85%5.39%
CXAP.L
UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc		25.34%10.65%8.67%-10.60%27.69%36.79%-4.93%7.15%-6.02%5.06%

Correlation

The correlation between UC90.L and CXAP.L is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.81

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2016

0.76

The correlation between UC90.L and CXAP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
UC90.L
CXAP.L

Technology

31.0%
32.6%

Communication Services

15.0%
10.6%

Energy

14.2%
2.9%

Financial Services

10.9%
12.6%

Healthcare

9.8%
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.3%
10.6%

Industrials

6.6%
14.6%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
3.9%

Utilities

1.1%
4.4%

Basic Materials

0.5%
1.4%

Real Estate

-

0.2%

Technology

UC90.L
31.0%
CXAP.L
32.6%

Communication Services

UC90.L
15.0%
CXAP.L
10.6%

Energy

UC90.L
14.2%
CXAP.L
2.9%

Financial Services

UC90.L
10.9%
CXAP.L
12.6%

Healthcare

UC90.L
9.8%
CXAP.L
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

UC90.L
7.3%
CXAP.L
10.6%

Industrials

UC90.L
6.6%
CXAP.L
14.6%

Consumer Defensive

UC90.L
3.7%
CXAP.L
3.9%

Utilities

UC90.L
1.1%
CXAP.L
4.4%

Basic Materials

UC90.L
0.5%
CXAP.L
1.4%

Real Estate

UC90.L

-

CXAP.L
0.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc

UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc

Often compared with UC90.L:
UC90.L vs. ROLG.LUC90.L vs. AIGC.LUC90.L vs. BCOG.LUC90.L vs. XDBG.LUC90.L vs. XFRM.LUC90.L vs. ENCG.LUC90.L vs. XBCU.L
Often compared with CXAP.L:
CXAP.L vs. UD06.LCXAP.L vs. ETRA.LCXAP.L vs. RMAU.LCXAP.L vs. WCOM.LCXAP.L vs. COMX.LCXAP.L vs. CMOD.LCXAP.L vs. WCOB.L

Return for Risk

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
UC90.L
UC90.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
UC90.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UC90.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
UC90.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
UC90.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
UC90.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
CXAP.L
CXAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CXAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc (UC90.L) and UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.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.

UC90.LCXAP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.43
2.87

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.21
3.68

-0.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.51

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.33

7.76

-1.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.07

20.14

-6.07

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UC90.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the CXAP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UC90.L and CXAP.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

UC90.LCXAP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.43

2.87

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

0.90

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.74

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.76

-0.37

Drawdowns

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UC90.L drawdown since its inception was -41.45%, which is greater than CXAP.L's maximum drawdown of -31.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UC90.L and CXAP.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

UC90.LCXAP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.45%

-31.30%

-10.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.79%

-5.75%

+0.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.47%

-15.43%

+3.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.19%

-21.53%

+2.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.26%

-31.30%

-6.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.67%

-1.52%

-3.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.18%

-8.23%

-4.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.16%

2.22%

-0.06%

Volatility

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (IE) CMCI Composite SF UCITS ETF (hedged to GBP) A-acc (UC90.L) has a higher volatility of 4.94% compared to UBS ETF (IE) CMCI ex-Agriculture SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CXAP.L) at 4.37%. This indicates that UC90.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CXAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

UC90.LCXAP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.94%

4.37%

+0.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.29%

12.75%

-2.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.48%

15.59%

-3.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.75%

16.18%

-1.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.23%

16.05%

-1.82%

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UC90.L and CXAP.L have an expense ratio of 0.34%.

Dividends

UC90.L vs. CXAP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither UC90.L nor CXAP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

UC90.L and CXAP.L have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.34% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UC90.L and CXAP.L have the same expense ratio: 0.34% per year.

UC90.L tracks UBS CMCI (GBP Hedged), while CXAP.L tracks UBS CMCI Ex Agriculture Ex Livestock Capped.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UC90.L and CXAP.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