UCIB vs. BWET

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and BWET (Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF) are both Commodities funds - UCIB tracks the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index while BWET tracks the Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, UCIB returned 14.28%/yr vs 145.24%/yr for BWET. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 3.50%/yr for BWET.

Performance

UCIB vs. BWET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 23.71% return, which is significantly lower than BWET's 990.13% 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%

BWET

• 1D: 11.71%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: 990.13%
• 6M: 857.64%
• 1Y: 2,014.90%
• 3Y*: 145.24%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UCIB vs. BWET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	23.71%	8.97%	6.58%	3.40%
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	990.13%	96.22%	-39.21%	15.94%

Correlation

The correlation between UCIB and BWET is 0.02, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2023	0.00

Return for Risk

UCIB vs. BWET — Risk / Return Rank

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

UCIB

UCIB Risk / Return Rank: 39
UCIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
UCIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
UCIB Omega Ratio Rank: 50
UCIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
UCIB Martin Ratio Rank: 44

BWET

BWET Risk / Return Rank: 99
BWET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BWET Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BWET Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

UCIB vs. BWET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). 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	BWET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.03	20.67	-19.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	6.77	-5.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.99	-0.69
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	66.60	-64.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	176.91	-169.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UCIB vs. BWET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UCIB Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is lower than the BWET Sharpe Ratio of 20.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UCIB and BWET, 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

	UCIB	BWET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.03	20.67	-19.64
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	2.01	-1.62

Drawdowns

UCIB vs. BWET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -36.94%, smaller than the maximum BWET drawdown of -56.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and BWET.

Drawdown Indicators

	UCIB	BWET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.94%	-56.90%	+19.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.53%	-30.64%	+15.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.18%	-56.90%	+40.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.95%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.94%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.40%	-0.90%	-12.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.06%	-24.06%	+15.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.62%	11.51%	-6.89%

Volatility

UCIB vs. BWET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) is 16.26%, while Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) has a volatility of 28.88%. This indicates that UCIB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UCIB	BWET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.26%	28.88%	-12.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.13%	88.79%	-57.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.80%	98.73%	-66.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.76%	70.70%	-43.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.23%	70.70%	-47.47%

UCIB vs. BWET - Expense Ratio Comparison

UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than BWET's 3.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

UCIB vs. BWET - Dividend Comparison

Neither UCIB nor BWET has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UCIB and BWET in my portfolio?

UCIB and BWET have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UCIB or BWET?

BWET has higher volatility (28.88%) compared to UCIB (16.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -36.94% vs BWET's -56.90%.

Which ETF is better, UCIB or BWET?

On 3-year performance, BWET leads with 145.24% vs 14.28% for UCIB. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, UCIB has been the lower-risk option at 16.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UCIB or BWET?

Over the 3-year period, BWET has performed better with a 145.24% return vs 14.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UCIB or BWET?

UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 3.50% for BWET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UCIB or BWET?

UCIB and BWET have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between UCIB and BWET?

UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while BWET tracks Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 3.50% for BWET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (20.67 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.