UD07.L vs. CMOD.L
UD07.L (UBS ETFs (IE) Bloomberg Commodity CMCI SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and CMOD.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF) are both Commodities funds - UD07.L tracks the UBS BCOM Constant Maturity while CMOD.L tracks the Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UD07.L returned 13.48%/yr vs 12.38%/yr for CMOD.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UD07.L charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for CMOD.L.
Performance
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
UD07.L is traded in GBp, while CMOD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CMOD.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UD07.L achieves a 21.43% return, which is significantly lower than CMOD.L's 26.83% return.
UD07.L
- 1D
- 0.85%
- 1M
- 1.49%
- YTD
- 21.43%
- 6M
- 20.72%
- 1Y
- 35.14%
- 3Y*
- 12.39%
- 5Y*
- 13.48%
- 10Y*
- —
CMOD.L
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- -0.64%
- YTD
- 26.83%
- 6M
- 24.94%
- 1Y
- 40.17%
- 3Y*
- 13.30%
- 5Y*
- 12.38%
- 10Y*
- —
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UD07.L UBS ETFs (IE) Bloomberg Commodity CMCI SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | 21.43% | 9.88% | 6.26% | -10.97% | 32.08% | 31.93% | -1.26% | 2.82% | -2.04% |
CMOD.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF | 26.83% | 7.88% | 5.95% | -12.18% | 28.11% | 28.55% | -6.69% | 2.58% | -3.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between UD07.L and CMOD.L is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2018 | 0.89 |
The correlation between UD07.L and CMOD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Communication Services
Technology
Industrials
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Defensive
Energy
-
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Communication Services
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Technology
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Industrials
UD07.L
CMOD.L
-
Financial Services
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Consumer Cyclical
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Healthcare
UD07.L
CMOD.L
-
Utilities
UD07.L
CMOD.L
-
Consumer Defensive
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Energy
UD07.L
CMOD.L
-
Basic Materials
UD07.L
CMOD.L
Real Estate
UD07.L
CMOD.L
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
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L — Risk / Return Rank
UD07.L
CMOD.L
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETFs (IE) Bloomberg Commodity CMCI SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UD07.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L). 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.
| UD07.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.41 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.37 | 5.27 | +0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.77 | 12.28 | +1.48 |
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
| UD07.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.35 | 2.20 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.74 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.39 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UD07.L drawdown since its inception was -39.71%, which is greater than CMOD.L's maximum drawdown of -32.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UD07.L and CMOD.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UD07.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.71% | -32.23% | -7.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.51% | -7.58% | +1.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.61% | -14.94% | +2.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.71% | -28.94% | -10.77% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.33% | -3.56% | -7.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.80% | -14.42% | -4.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.55% | 3.26% | -0.71% |
Volatility
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETFs (IE) Bloomberg Commodity CMCI SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (UD07.L) is 5.26%, while Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) has a volatility of 5.58%. This indicates that UD07.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMOD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UD07.L | CMOD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.26% | 5.58% | -0.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.50% | 15.80% | -3.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.87% | 18.15% | -3.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.79% | 16.80% | +11.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.77% | 15.37% | +8.40% |
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
UD07.L has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than CMOD.L's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
UD07.L vs. CMOD.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither UD07.L nor CMOD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, UD07.L and CMOD.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, CMOD.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CMOD.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for UD07.L.
UD07.L tracks UBS BCOM Constant Maturity, while CMOD.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for UD07.L and 0.19% for CMOD.L.
Find the right allocation for UD07.L and CMOD.L
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