UCIB vs. CMDT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both Commodities funds - UCIB tracks the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index while CMDT tracks the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, UCIB returned 14.28%/yr vs 16.55%/yr for CMDT. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.

Performance

UCIB vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with UCIB having a 23.71% return and CMDT slightly lower at 22.69%.

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%

CMDT

• 1D: -1.03%
• 1M: -2.01%
• YTD: 22.69%
• 6M: 22.11%
• 1Y: 34.25%
• 3Y*: 16.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UCIB vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	23.71%	8.97%	6.58%	2.26%
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	22.69%	12.78%	6.93%	5.50%

Correlation

The correlation between UCIB and CMDT is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.54

The correlation between UCIB and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (3 years) to 0.73 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

UCIB vs. CMDT — 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

CMDT

CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 87
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.03	2.77	-1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	3.74	-2.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.48	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	7.67	-5.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	20.89	-13.79
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. CMDT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UCIB Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is lower than the CMDT Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UCIB and CMDT, 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	CMDT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.03	2.77	-1.74
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	1.29	-0.90

Drawdowns

UCIB vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -36.94%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -9.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and CMDT.

Drawdown Indicators

	UCIB	CMDT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.94%	-9.69%	-27.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.53%	-4.49%	-11.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.18%	-9.69%	-6.49%
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%	-3.86%	-9.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.06%	-2.69%	-6.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.62%	1.64%	+2.98%

Volatility

UCIB vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 16.26% compared to PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) at 4.42%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UCIB	CMDT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.26%	4.42%	+11.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.13%	10.33%	+20.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.80%	12.40%	+19.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.76%	12.22%	+14.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.23%	12.22%	+11.01%

UCIB vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison

UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

UCIB vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison

UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.47%	3.04%	8.80%	2.71%
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UCIB and CMDT in my portfolio?

UCIB and CMDT have a correlation of 0.73, 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 CMDT?

UCIB has higher volatility (16.26%) compared to CMDT (4.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -36.94% vs CMDT's -9.69%.

Which ETF is better, UCIB or CMDT?

On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 16.55% vs 14.28% for UCIB. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, CMDT has been the lower-risk option at 4.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UCIB or CMDT?

Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 16.55% 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 CMDT?

UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CMDT.

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

CMDT has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.

What is the main difference between UCIB and CMDT?

UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while CMDT tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.65% for CMDT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 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.