UCIB vs. KMAY

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and KMAY (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May) are both exchange-traded funds - UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while KMAY is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator. UCIB is passively managed, while KMAY is actively managed. Over the past year, UCIB returned 32.01% vs 15.74% for KMAY. Their -0.10 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAY.

Performance

UCIB vs. KMAY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May (KMAY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 23.75% return, which is significantly higher than KMAY's 7.48% return.

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%

KMAY

• 1D: 0.77%
• 1M: 0.32%
• 6M: 6.05%
• YTD: 7.48%
• 1Y: 15.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.66%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
KMAY Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May	$121.12K	$280.27K	$900.00K
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	$582.36K	$305.70K	$123.29K

UCIB vs. KMAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B	23.75%	12.28%
KMAY Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May	7.48%	14.13%

Correlation

The correlation between UCIB and KMAY is -0.12, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2025	-0.10

Return for Risk

UCIB vs. KMAY — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

UCIB

UCIB Risk / Return Rank: 40
UCIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
UCIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
UCIB Omega Ratio Rank: 54
UCIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
UCIB Martin Ratio Rank: 38

KMAY

KMAY Risk / Return Rank: 94
KMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
KMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
KMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 93
KMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
KMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 96

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

UCIB vs. KMAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May (KMAY). 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	KMAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	2.43	-1.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	3.69	-2.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.50	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.42	6.65	-5.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.13	27.16	-23.03

UCIB vs. KMAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UCIB Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the KMAY Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UCIB and KMAY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

UCIB vs. KMAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -51.29%, which is greater than KMAY's maximum drawdown of -2.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and KMAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	UCIB	KMAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.29%	-2.38%	-48.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.67%	-2.38%	-20.29%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.37%	-0.04%	-13.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.97%	-0.37%	-20.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.77%	0.58%	+7.19%

Volatility

UCIB vs. KMAY - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 22.90% compared to Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - May (KMAY) at 1.95%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KMAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UCIB	KMAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.90%	1.95%	+20.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.85%	5.18%	+31.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.64%	6.52%	+33.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.70%	6.92%	+21.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.45%	6.92%	+17.53%

UCIB vs. KMAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than KMAY's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

UCIB vs. KMAY - Dividend Comparison

Neither UCIB nor KMAY has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UCIB and KMAY in my portfolio?

UCIB and KMAY have a correlation of -0.12, 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 KMAY?

UCIB has higher volatility (22.90%) compared to KMAY (1.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -51.29% vs KMAY's -2.38%.

Which ETF is better, UCIB or KMAY?

On 1-year performance, UCIB leads with 32.01% vs 15.74% for KMAY. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, KMAY has been the lower-risk option at 1.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UCIB or KMAY?

Over the 1-year period, UCIB has performed better with a 32.01% return vs 15.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UCIB or KMAY?

UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KMAY.

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

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

What is the main difference between UCIB and KMAY?

UCIB is categorized as Commodities, while KMAY is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.79% for KMAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 0.81), 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.