UCIB vs. BSMW
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and BSMW (Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while BSMW is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares USD Municipal Bond 2032 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, UCIB returned 14.28%/yr vs 3.23%/yr for BSMW. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for BSMW.
Performance
UCIB vs. BSMW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 23.71% return, which is significantly higher than BSMW's 1.28% return.
UCIB
- 1D
- 2.52%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 23.71%
- 6M
- 24.60%
- 1Y
- 32.69%
- 3Y*
- 14.28%
- 5Y*
- 12.32%
- 10Y*
- 10.57%
BSMW
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.65%
- YTD
- 1.28%
- 6M
- 1.64%
- 1Y
- 6.54%
- 3Y*
- 3.23%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UCIB vs. BSMW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 23.71% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -1.49% |
BSMW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF | 1.28% | 3.42% | -0.35% | 7.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and BSMW is -0.27, 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 | -0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2023 | -0.05 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between UCIB and BSMW has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.05 to -0.27, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
UCIB vs. BSMW — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
BSMW
UCIB vs. BSMW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMW). 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.
| UCIB | BSMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.47 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.12 | 2.25 | -0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.10 | 7.09 | +0.01 |
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
| UCIB | BSMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.03 | 2.35 | -1.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.69 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
UCIB vs. BSMW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -36.94%, which is greater than BSMW's maximum drawdown of -7.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and BSMW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | BSMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.94% | -7.57% | -29.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.53% | -2.92% | -12.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.18% | -7.34% | -8.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.95% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.40% | -1.00% | -12.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.06% | -1.72% | -7.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.62% | 0.92% | +3.70% |
Volatility
UCIB vs. BSMW - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 16.26% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMW) at 0.92%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSMW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | BSMW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.26% | 0.92% | +15.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 31.13% | 1.97% | +29.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.80% | 2.81% | +28.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.76% | 5.00% | +21.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.23% | 5.00% | +18.23% |
UCIB vs. BSMW - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMW's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. BSMW - Dividend Comparison
UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BSMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.20%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF | 3.20% | 3.24% | 3.48% | 2.36% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and BSMW have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCIB has higher volatility (16.26%) compared to BSMW (0.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -36.94% vs BSMW's -7.57%.
On 3-year performance, UCIB leads with 14.28% vs 3.23% for BSMW. On fees, BSMW is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMW has been the lower-risk option at 0.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, UCIB has performed better with a 14.28% return vs 3.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BSMW is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for UCIB.
BSMW has the higher dividend yield at 3.20%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
UCIB is categorized as Commodities, while BSMW is Municipal Bonds. UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while BSMW tracks Invesco BulletShares USD Municipal Bond 2032 Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.18% for BSMW.
BSMW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.03), 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 UCIB and BSMW
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