PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.L) and L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDBG.L achieves a 23.03% return, which is significantly higher than CMFP.L's 19.16% return. Over the past 10 years, XDBG.L has underperformed CMFP.L with an annualized return of 8.57%, while CMFP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 9.22% annualized return.


XDBG.L

1D
-0.42%
1M
0.58%
YTD
23.03%
6M
26.01%
1Y
44.88%
3Y*
18.96%
5Y*
14.38%
10Y*
8.57%

CMFP.L

1D
-1.12%
1M
-1.18%
YTD
19.16%
6M
18.60%
1Y
32.00%
3Y*
10.92%
5Y*
13.29%
10Y*
9.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDBG.L
Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged
23.03%25.68%8.15%-11.18%18.13%38.25%-3.17%5.10%-12.92%4.24%
CMFP.L
L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF
19.16%8.49%6.86%-11.43%32.79%34.61%-0.92%3.99%-3.16%-6.17%

Correlation

The correlation between XDBG.L and CMFP.L is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.72

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2011

0.61

The correlation between XDBG.L and CMFP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (all time) to 0.75 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XDBG.L
CMFP.L

Technology

36.3%
5.1%

Communication Services

17.2%
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

11.8%
13.6%

Industrials

10.6%

-

Financial Services

5.2%
10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

4.9%
8.3%

Basic Materials

4.0%
49.3%

Healthcare

4.0%

-

Energy

3.1%

-

Real Estate

2.8%
5.5%

Utilities

1.1%

-

Technology

XDBG.L
36.3%
CMFP.L
5.1%

Communication Services

XDBG.L
17.2%
CMFP.L
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

XDBG.L
11.8%
CMFP.L
13.6%

Industrials

XDBG.L
10.6%
CMFP.L

-

Financial Services

XDBG.L
5.2%
CMFP.L
10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

XDBG.L
4.9%
CMFP.L
8.3%

Basic Materials

XDBG.L
4.0%
CMFP.L
49.3%

Healthcare

XDBG.L
4.0%
CMFP.L

-

Energy

XDBG.L
3.1%
CMFP.L

-

Real Estate

XDBG.L
2.8%
CMFP.L
5.5%

Utilities

XDBG.L
1.1%
CMFP.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

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDBG.L
XDBG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
XDBG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDBG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

CMFP.L
CMFP.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.L) 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.


XDBG.LCMFP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.39

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.77

4.81

-0.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.39

11.77

+1.62

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDBG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the CMFP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDBG.L 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XDBG.LCMFP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.16

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.89

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.66

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.08

0.27

-0.19

Drawdowns

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDBG.L drawdown since its inception was -64.69%, which is greater than CMFP.L's maximum drawdown of -50.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDBG.L and CMFP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDBG.LCMFP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.69%

-50.47%

-14.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.36%

-6.63%

-2.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.02%

-12.97%

-0.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.67%

-23.51%

-5.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.06%

-23.95%

-13.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.78%

-3.64%

+0.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-35.22%

-24.51%

-10.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.34%

2.71%

+0.63%

Volatility

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Bloomberg Commodity ex-Agriculture & Livestock Swap UCITS ETF 3C GBP Hedged (XDBG.L) is 4.24%, while L&G Longer Dated All Commodities UCITS ETF (CMFP.L) has a volatility of 4.82%. This indicates that XDBG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMFP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDBG.LCMFP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.24%

4.82%

-0.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.16%

12.18%

+2.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.76%

14.73%

+3.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.95%

14.86%

+4.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.01%

13.92%

+2.09%

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDBG.L has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than CMFP.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

XDBG.L vs. CMFP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDBG.L nor CMFP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XDBG.L and CMFP.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CMFP.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CMFP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for XDBG.L.

XDBG.L tracks Bloomberg ex-Agriculture and Livestock 15/30 Capped 3 Month Forward (GBP Hedged), while CMFP.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity 3 Month Forward. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XDBG.L and 0.30% for CMFP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDBG.L and CMFP.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