VB vs. CMFP.L

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

VB (Vanguard Small-Cap ETF) and CMFP.L (L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VB is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Small Cap Index, while CMFP.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, VB returned 11.68%/yr vs 7.84%/yr for CMFP.L. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VB charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CMFP.L.

Performance

VB vs. CMFP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

VB is traded in USD, while CMFP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CMFP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VB achieves a 16.13% return, which is significantly higher than CMFP.L's 13.99% return. Over the past 10 years, VB has outperformed CMFP.L with an annualized return of 11.68%, while CMFP.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.84% annualized return.

VB

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 5.90%
• YTD: 16.13%
• 6M: 15.08%
• 1Y: 31.74%
• 3Y*: 16.53%
• 5Y*: 7.37%
• 10Y*: 11.68%

CMFP.L

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -5.94%
• YTD: 13.99%
• 6M: 16.26%
• 1Y: 22.47%
• 3Y*: 10.93%
• 5Y*: 11.33%
• 10Y*: 7.84%

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

VB vs. CMFP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF	16.13%	8.87%	14.17%	18.22%	-17.51%	17.57%	19.19%	27.34%	-9.34%	16.26%
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	13.99%	16.67%	5.08%	-6.76%	18.60%	33.39%	2.11%	8.16%	-8.64%	2.76%

Correlation

The correlation between VB and CMFP.L is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2010	0.25

Over the past year, the correlation between VB and CMFP.L has dropped to 0.02 - well below their long-term average of 0.25, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

VB vs. CMFP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

VB

VB Risk / Return Rank: 69
VB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
VB Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
VB Omega Ratio Rank: 61
VB Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
VB Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CMFP.L

CMFP.L Risk / Return Rank: 52
CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CMFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
CMFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 48
CMFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
CMFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

VB vs. CMFP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.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.

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.

	VB	CMFP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	1.55	+0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	2.07	+0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.27	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.55	2.70	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.04	7.67	+5.37

VB vs. CMFP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VB Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VB and CMFP.L, 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

VB vs. CMFP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VB drawdown since its inception was -59.56%, smaller than the maximum CMFP.L drawdown of -72.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VB and CMFP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	VB	CMFP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.56%	-72.10%	+12.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.98%	-8.27%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.36%	-23.04%	-2.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.15%	-23.04%	-5.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.05%	-30.49%	-11.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-21.78%	+21.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.43%	-49.88%	+41.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	2.92%	-0.48%

Volatility

VB vs. CMFP.L - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) has a higher volatility of 5.43% compared to L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) at 4.25%. This indicates that VB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMFP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VB	CMFP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.43%	4.25%	+1.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.21%	12.41%	-0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.63%	14.44%	+2.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.81%	20.39%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.45%	16.60%	+4.85%

VB vs. CMFP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

VB has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CMFP.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

VB vs. CMFP.L - Dividend Comparison

VB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, while CMFP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CMFP.L L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF	1.17%	1.33%	1.30%	1.55%	1.59%	1.24%	1.14%	1.39%	1.67%	1.35%	1.50%	1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VB and CMFP.L in my portfolio?

VB and CMFP.L have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, VB or CMFP.L?

On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VB or CMFP.L?

VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CMFP.L.

What is the main difference between VB and CMFP.L?

VB is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while CMFP.L is Commodities. VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index, while CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VB and 0.30% for CMFP.L.