USML vs. CEFD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

USML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN) and CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - USML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index, while CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, USML returned 8.11%/yr vs 3.13%/yr for CEFD. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

USML vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USML achieves a 2.96% return, which is significantly lower than CEFD's 6.26% return.

USML

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 3.76%
• YTD: 2.96%
• 6M: 2.63%
• 1Y: 2.80%
• 3Y*: 16.27%
• 5Y*: 8.11%
• 10Y*: —

CEFD

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 3.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

USML vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN	2.96%	9.33%	23.97%	11.37%	-22.87%	42.12%
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	6.26%	14.15%	20.06%	8.36%	-28.93%	18.47%

Correlation

The correlation between USML and CEFD is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021	0.61

Over the past year, the correlation between USML and CEFD has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.61, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

USML vs. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

USML

USML Risk / Return Rank: 11
USML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
USML Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
USML Omega Ratio Rank: 10
USML Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
USML Martin Ratio Rank: 12

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

USML vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). 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.

	USML	CEFD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.17	1.43	-1.26
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.35	2.03	-1.68
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.29	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.21	1.47	-1.26
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.65	6.84	-6.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

USML vs. CEFD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USML Sharpe Ratio is 0.17, which is lower than the CEFD Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USML and CEFD, 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

	USML	CEFD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17	1.43	-1.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.18	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.52	-0.08

Drawdowns

USML vs. CEFD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USML drawdown since its inception was -35.34%, roughly equal to the maximum CEFD drawdown of -36.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USML and CEFD.

Drawdown Indicators

	USML	CEFD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.34%	-36.95%	+1.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.09%	-12.51%	-0.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.14%	-21.76%	+2.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.34%	-36.95%	+1.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.69%	-1.14%	-2.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.41%	-11.72%	+1.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	2.68%	+1.65%

Volatility

USML vs. CEFD - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) have volatilities of 4.22% and 4.05%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	USML	CEFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.22%	4.05%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.44%	11.27%	+0.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.38%	12.86%	+3.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.47%	17.93%	+6.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.29%	17.31%	+6.98%

USML vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both USML and CEFD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

USML vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison

USML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.58%	14.88%	13.90%	14.76%	16.56%	10.31%	5.37%
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both USML and CEFD in my portfolio?

USML and CEFD have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, USML or CEFD?

USML has higher volatility (4.22%) compared to CEFD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USML dropped -35.34% vs CEFD's -36.95%.

Which ETF is better, USML or CEFD?

On 5-year performance, USML leads with 8.11% vs 3.13% for CEFD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, CEFD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, USML or CEFD?

Over the 5-year period, USML has performed better with a 8.11% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, USML or CEFD?

USML and CEFD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, USML or CEFD?

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for USML.

What is the main difference between USML and CEFD?

USML tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index, while CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.17), 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.