UCIB vs. COMB
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Commodities funds. UCIB is passively managed, while COMB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, UCIB returned 11.77%/yr vs 11.27%/yr for COMB. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for COMB.
Performance
UCIB vs. COMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 20.67% return, which is significantly lower than COMB's 26.81% 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%
COMB
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -2.98%
- YTD
- 26.81%
- 6M
- 25.89%
- 1Y
- 38.86%
- 3Y*
- 16.31%
- 5Y*
- 11.27%
- 10Y*
- —
UCIB vs. COMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 20.67% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -2.26% | 18.24% | 37.34% | 1.10% | 10.86% | -9.48% | 11.73% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 26.81% | 15.12% | 5.24% | -7.75% | 14.56% | 26.34% | -2.95% | 7.02% | -11.41% | 4.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and COMB is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2017 | 0.63 |
The correlation between UCIB and COMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (3 years) to 0.76 (1 year), 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. COMB — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
COMB
UCIB vs. COMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB). 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 | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.41 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.92 | 5.08 | -3.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.55 | 13.24 | -6.69 |
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 | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 | 2.29 | -1.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 | 0.68 | -0.24 |
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. COMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -36.94%, which is greater than COMB's maximum drawdown of -33.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and COMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.94% | -33.50% | -3.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.53% | -7.69% | -7.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.18% | -11.35% | -4.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.95% | -26.63% | +5.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.53% | -4.35% | -11.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.06% | -12.06% | +3.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.54% | 2.94% | +1.60% |
Volatility
UCIB vs. COMB - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 16.62% compared to GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) at 5.14%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.62% | 5.14% | +11.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 31.05% | 14.99% | +16.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.72% | 17.02% | +14.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.74% | 16.70% | +10.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.22% | 15.13% | +8.09% |
UCIB vs. COMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than COMB's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. COMB - Dividend Comparison
UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.14%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 7.14% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and COMB have a correlation of 0.76, 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 COMB (5.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -36.94% vs COMB's -33.50%.
On 5-year performance, UCIB leads with 11.77% vs 11.27% for COMB. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, COMB has been the lower-risk option at 5.14%. 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 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for UCIB.
COMB has the higher dividend yield at 7.14%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
They also come from different issuers: UBS and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.25% for COMB.
COMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 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 COMB
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