BZ=F vs. CL=F

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BZ=F (Crude Oil Brent) and CL=F (Crude Oil WTI) are both assets. Over the past 10 years, BZ=F returned 6.79%/yr vs 6.75%/yr for CL=F. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure.

Performance

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Crude Oil Brent (BZ=F) and Crude Oil WTI (CL=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BZ=F achieves a 57.40% return, which is significantly lower than CL=F's 62.64% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with BZ=F having a 6.79% annualized return and CL=F not far behind at 6.75%.

BZ=F

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: -11.45%
• YTD: 57.40%
• 6M: 53.37%
• 1Y: 48.20%
• 3Y*: 7.95%
• 5Y*: 6.08%
• 10Y*: 6.79%

CL=F

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -8.39%
• YTD: 62.64%
• 6M: 59.26%
• 1Y: 49.38%
• 3Y*: 9.14%
• 5Y*: 6.36%
• 10Y*: 6.75%

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

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BZ=F Crude Oil Brent	57.40%	-18.48%	-3.12%	-10.32%	10.45%	50.15%	-21.52%	22.68%	-19.55%	17.69%
CL=F Crude Oil WTI	62.64%	-19.41%	-0.82%	-10.70%	7.44%	53.98%	-19.98%	32.92%	-24.35%	12.51%

Correlation

The correlation between BZ=F and CL=F is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 1988	0.80

The correlation between BZ=F and CL=F shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (all time) to 0.92 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BZ=F vs. CL=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

BZ=F

BZ=F Risk / Return Rank: 33
BZ=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
BZ=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
BZ=F Omega Ratio Rank: 20
BZ=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BZ=F Martin Ratio Rank: 48

CL=F

CL=F Risk / Return Rank: 28
CL=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
CL=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CL=F Omega Ratio Rank: 24
CL=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CL=F Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crude Oil Brent (BZ=F) and Crude Oil WTI (CL=F). 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.

	BZ=F	CL=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	0.89	0.00
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.35	1.38	-0.03
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.21	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.75	1.49	+0.26
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.64	3.14	+0.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BZ=F Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is comparable to the CL=F Sharpe Ratio of 0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BZ=F and CL=F, 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

	BZ=F	CL=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89	0.89	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16	0.16	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.17	0.13	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	0.06	+0.07

Drawdowns

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BZ=F drawdown since its inception was -86.77%, smaller than the maximum CL=F drawdown of -92.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BZ=F and CL=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	BZ=F	CL=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.77%	-92.04%	+5.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.63%	-27.07%	+3.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.97%	-39.46%	+0.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-53.96%	-53.86%	-0.10%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-77.60%	-84.82%	+7.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.43%	-35.72%	+1.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.98%	-40.81%	-0.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.34%	12.23%	-0.89%

Volatility

BZ=F vs. CL=F - Volatility Comparison

Crude Oil Brent (BZ=F) and Crude Oil WTI (CL=F) have volatilities of 16.99% and 17.06%, 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

	BZ=F	CL=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.99%	17.06%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.63%	46.43%	-0.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.56%	49.20%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.42%	38.88%	-1.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.20%	49.55%	-10.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BZ=F and CL=F in my portfolio?

BZ=F and CL=F have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BZ=F or CL=F?

CL=F has higher volatility (17.06%) compared to BZ=F (16.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BZ=F dropped -86.77% vs CL=F's -92.04%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BZ=F currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.89 vs 0.89), 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.