UCIB vs. CEFD
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UCIB returned 11.77%/yr vs 3.13%/yr for CEFD. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for CEFD.
Performance
UCIB vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 20.67% return, which is significantly higher than CEFD's 6.26% return.
UCIB
- 1D
- -1.83%
- 1M
- -5.93%
- YTD
- 20.67%
- 6M
- 21.76%
- 1Y
- 29.68%
- 3Y*
- 13.51%
- 5Y*
- 11.77%
- 10Y*
- 10.30%
CEFD
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 15.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.13%
- 10Y*
- —
UCIB vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 20.67% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -2.26% | 18.24% | 37.34% | 27.99% |
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 6.26% | 14.15% | 20.06% | 8.36% | -28.93% | 22.09% | 21.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and CEFD is -0.01, 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 | -0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.19 |
The correlation between UCIB and CEFD shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
CEFD
UCIB vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). 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 | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.29 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.92 | 1.47 | +0.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.55 | 6.84 | -0.29 |
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 | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 | 1.43 | -0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 | 0.18 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.45 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.52 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
UCIB vs. CEFD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -36.94%, roughly equal to the maximum CEFD drawdown of -36.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and CEFD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.94% | -36.95% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.53% | -12.51% | -3.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.18% | -21.76% | +5.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.95% | -36.95% | +16.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.53% | -1.14% | -14.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.06% | -11.72% | +2.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.54% | 2.68% | +1.86% |
Volatility
UCIB vs. CEFD - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 16.62% compared to ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) at 4.05%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | CEFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.62% | 4.05% | +12.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 31.05% | 11.27% | +19.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.72% | 12.86% | +18.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.74% | 17.93% | +8.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.22% | 17.31% | +5.91% |
UCIB vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison
UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN | 14.58% | 14.88% | 13.90% | 14.76% | 16.56% | 10.31% | 5.37% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and CEFD have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCIB has higher volatility (16.62%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -36.94% vs CEFD's -36.95%.
On 5-year performance, UCIB leads with 11.77% vs 3.13% for CEFD. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, UCIB has performed better with a 11.77% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for CEFD.
CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.95% for CEFD.
CEFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.94), 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 CEFD
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