UCIB vs. CCOM
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and CCOM (Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Commodities funds. UCIB is passively managed, while CCOM is actively managed. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for CCOM.
Performance
UCIB vs. CCOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
UCIB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 6.70%
- 6M
- 20.34%
- YTD
- 23.75%
- 1Y
- 32.01%
- 3Y*
- 11.45%
- 5Y*
- 12.44%
- 10Y*
- 10.54%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.77%
CCOM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -1.27%
- 6M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $489.06 | $1.63K | $4.84K | |
| $582.36K | $305.70K | $123.29K |
UCIB vs. CCOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 17.54% |
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF | -3.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and CCOM is 0.15, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2026 | 0.15 |
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. CCOM — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
CCOM
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
UCIB vs. CCOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (CCOM). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| UCIB | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.42 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.13 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UCIB vs. CCOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -51.29%, which is greater than CCOM's maximum drawdown of -7.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and CCOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.29% | -7.44% | -43.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.37% | -5.67% | -7.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.97% | -3.35% | -17.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.77% | — | — |
Volatility
UCIB vs. CCOM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | CCOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.90% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.85% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.64% | 12.48% | +27.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.70% | 12.48% | +16.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.45% | 12.48% | +11.97% |
UCIB vs. CCOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than CCOM's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. CCOM - Dividend Comparison
UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
CCOM Simplify Chinese Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF | 1.26% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and CCOM have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for CCOM.
CCOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.26%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
They also come from different issuers: UBS and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.99% for CCOM.
Find the right allocation for UCIB and CCOM
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