PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMES vs. USL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMES vs. USL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and United States 12 Month Oil Fund LP (USL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMES achieves a 28.30% return, which is significantly lower than USL's 63.07% return.


EMES

1D
-1.25%
1M
5.92%
YTD
28.30%
6M
29.99%
1Y
46.81%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

USL

1D
1.55%
1M
-1.61%
YTD
63.07%
6M
59.66%
1Y
57.86%
3Y*
18.42%
5Y*
17.41%
10Y*
10.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMES vs. USL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EMES and USL is -0.26, 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

-0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025

-0.24

EMES vs. USL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMES
USL

Technology

42.9%

-

Industrials

16.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

14.8%

-

Financial Services

14.2%
4.5%

Communication Services

4.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.1%

-

Real Estate

3.0%

-

Healthcare

1.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Energy

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

EMES
42.9%
USL

-

Industrials

EMES
16.3%
USL

-

Consumer Cyclical

EMES
14.8%
USL

-

Financial Services

EMES
14.2%
USL
4.5%

Communication Services

EMES
4.7%
USL

-

Consumer Defensive

EMES
3.1%
USL

-

Real Estate

EMES
3.0%
USL

-

Healthcare

EMES
1.1%
USL

-

Basic Materials

EMES

-

USL

-

Energy

EMES

-

USL

-

Utilities

EMES

-

USL

-

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

EMES vs. USL — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMES
EMES Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
EMES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMES Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMES Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
EMES Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMES Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

USL
USL Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
USL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
USL Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
USL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
USL Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
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.

EMES vs. USL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and United States 12 Month Oil Fund LP (USL). 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.


EMESUSLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.34

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.62

3.47

+0.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.07

7.02

+7.05

EMES vs. USL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMES Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the USL Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMES and USL, 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


EMESUSLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.25

2.04

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.06

0.01

+2.05

Drawdowns

EMES vs. USL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMES drawdown since its inception was -12.98%, smaller than the maximum USL drawdown of -89.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES and USL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMESUSLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.98%

-89.06%

+76.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.98%

-16.76%

+3.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-66.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-38.16%

+36.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.07%

-61.46%

+59.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.34%

8.27%

-4.93%

Volatility

EMES vs. USL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) is 8.70%, while United States 12 Month Oil Fund LP (USL) has a volatility of 10.53%. This indicates that EMES experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMESUSLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.70%

10.53%

-1.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.31%

23.33%

-5.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.89%

28.54%

-7.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.56%

30.08%

-9.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.56%

32.35%

-11.79%

EMES vs. USL - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMES has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than USL's 0.88% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMES vs. USL - Dividend Comparison

EMES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, while USL has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


EMES and USL have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

USL has higher volatility (10.53%) compared to EMES (8.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMES dropped -12.98% vs USL's -89.06%.

On 1-year performance, USL leads with 57.86% vs 46.81% for EMES. On fees, EMES is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EMES has been the lower-risk option at 8.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, USL has performed better with a 57.86% return vs 46.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMES is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for USL.

EMES has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.00% for USL.

EMES is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while USL is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EMES and 0.88% for USL.

EMES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 2.04), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMES and USL

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