UCIB vs. MTUL
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and MTUL (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while MTUL is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UCIB returned 12.44%/yr vs 15.37%/yr for MTUL. Their 0.16 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for MTUL.
Performance
UCIB vs. MTUL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 23.75% return, which is significantly lower than MTUL's 39.46% 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%
MTUL
- 1D
- 1.04%
- 1M
- -12.41%
- 6M
- 34.68%
- YTD
- 39.46%
- 1Y
- 51.48%
- 3Y*
- 48.16%
- 5Y*
- 15.37%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.44%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $205.26K | $149.84K | $116.28K | |
| $582.36K | $305.70K | $123.29K |
UCIB vs. MTUL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 23.75% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -2.26% | 18.24% | 30.12% |
MTUL ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN | 39.46% | 27.42% | 58.70% | 10.66% | -37.97% | 8.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and MTUL is 0.07, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.07 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.05 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.16 |
The correlation between UCIB and MTUL shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (3 years) to 0.16 (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. MTUL — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
MTUL
UCIB vs. MTUL - 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 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL). 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 | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.20 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.42 | 1.60 | -0.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.13 | 6.52 | -2.39 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UCIB vs. MTUL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -51.29%, smaller than the maximum MTUL drawdown of -56.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and MTUL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.29% | -56.83% | +5.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.67% | -32.27% | +9.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.67% | -39.15% | +16.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.67% | -56.83% | +34.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.37% | -21.93% | +8.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.97% | -22.29% | +1.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.77% | 7.91% | -0.14% |
Volatility
UCIB vs. MTUL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) is 22.90%, while ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a volatility of 26.68%. This indicates that UCIB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | MTUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.90% | 26.68% | -3.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.85% | 49.98% | -13.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.64% | 56.35% | -16.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.70% | 45.41% | -16.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.45% | 45.64% | -21.19% |
UCIB vs. MTUL - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than MTUL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. MTUL - Dividend Comparison
Neither UCIB nor MTUL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and MTUL have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUL has higher volatility (26.68%) compared to UCIB (22.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -51.29% vs MTUL's -56.83%.
On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 15.37% vs 12.44% for UCIB. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, UCIB has been the lower-risk option at 22.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 15.37% return vs 12.44%. 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 MTUL.
UCIB and MTUL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
UCIB is categorized as Commodities, while MTUL is Momentum. UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while MTUL tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.95% for MTUL.
MTUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.92 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.
Find the right allocation for UCIB and MTUL
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