WSML.L vs. CMOD.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WSML.L (iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CMOD.L (Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WSML.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Small Cap Index, while CMOD.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, WSML.L returned 6.95%/yr vs 11.19%/yr for CMOD.L. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. WSML.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for CMOD.L.

Performance

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (WSML.L) and Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WSML.L achieves a 13.77% return, which is significantly lower than CMOD.L's 26.36% return.

WSML.L

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 3.09%
• YTD: 13.77%
• 6M: 15.69%
• 1Y: 32.37%
• 3Y*: 17.80%
• 5Y*: 6.95%
• 10Y*: —

CMOD.L

• 1D: 0.44%
• 1M: -1.74%
• YTD: 26.36%
• 6M: 25.60%
• 1Y: 39.19%
• 3Y*: 16.17%
• 5Y*: 11.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
WSML.L iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	13.77%	19.94%	7.40%	17.06%	-18.62%	15.23%	16.50%	24.35%	-12.64%
CMOD.L Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF	26.36%	16.16%	4.13%	-7.56%	14.50%	27.35%	-3.87%	6.64%	-9.65%

Correlation

The correlation between WSML.L and CMOD.L is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.12
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2018	0.31

The correlation between WSML.L and CMOD.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WSML.L	CMOD.L
Industrials	20.5%	-
Financial Services	13.5%	17.8%
Technology	13.5%	5.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	12.9%
Healthcare	9.6%	-
Basic Materials	8.2%	35.8%
Real Estate	8.2%	5.8%
Energy	5.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	9.7%
Communication Services	3.0%	12.3%
Utilities	2.9%	-

Return for Risk

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

WSML.L

WSML.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
WSML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
WSML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
WSML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 62
WSML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
WSML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 69

CMOD.L

CMOD.L Risk / Return Rank: 72
CMOD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CMOD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CMOD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 71
CMOD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CMOD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (WSML.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.

	WSML.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	2.33	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.88	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.43	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.57	5.35	-1.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.00	12.47	+0.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WSML.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the CMOD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WSML.L and CMOD.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WSML.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.19	2.33	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	0.68	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.48	-0.02

Drawdowns

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WSML.L drawdown since its inception was -41.14%, which is greater than CMOD.L's maximum drawdown of -33.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WSML.L and CMOD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	WSML.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.14%	-33.16%	-7.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.03%	-7.30%	-1.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.10%	-11.66%	-8.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.50%	-26.86%	-3.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-4.16%	+3.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.80%	-12.29%	+3.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.48%	3.13%	-0.65%

Volatility

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (WSML.L) is 4.42%, while Invesco Bloomberg Commodity UCITS ETF (CMOD.L) has a volatility of 5.49%. This indicates that WSML.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.

Volatility by Period

	WSML.L	CMOD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.42%	5.49%	-1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.23%	14.87%	-3.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.75%	16.73%	-1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.48%	16.57%	+1.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.60%	14.68%	+4.92%

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WSML.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than CMOD.L's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

WSML.L vs. CMOD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither WSML.L nor CMOD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WSML.L and CMOD.L in my portfolio?

WSML.L and CMOD.L 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 ETF is better, WSML.L or CMOD.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, WSML.L or CMOD.L?

CMOD.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for WSML.L.

What is the main difference between WSML.L and CMOD.L?

WSML.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CMOD.L is Commodities. WSML.L tracks MSCI World Small Cap Index, while CMOD.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity TR Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for WSML.L and 0.19% for CMOD.L.