PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ES=F vs. CL=F
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

ES=F vs. CL=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in S&P 500 E-Mini Futures (ES=F) and Crude Oil WTI (CL=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ES=F
S&P 500 E-Mini Futures
-3.90%16.12%23.15%24.84%-18.86%26.94%16.02%28.97%-6.38%19.66%
CL=F
Crude Oil WTI
95.16%-19.41%-0.82%-10.70%7.44%53.98%-19.98%32.92%-24.35%12.51%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ES=F achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly lower than CL=F's 95.16% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ES=F having a 12.40% annualized return and CL=F not far behind at 12.12%.


ES=F

1D
0.09%
1M
-2.94%
YTD
-3.90%
6M
-2.11%
1Y
15.96%
3Y*
16.83%
5Y*
10.24%
10Y*
12.40%

CL=F

1D
11.93%
1M
50.30%
YTD
95.16%
6M
85.28%
1Y
56.27%
3Y*
11.68%
5Y*
12.76%
10Y*
12.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

ES=F vs. CL=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

ES=F
ES=F Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
ES=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ES=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
ES=F Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
ES=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
ES=F Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank

CL=F
CL=F Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
CL=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CL=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
CL=F Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
CL=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CL=F Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for S&P 500 E-Mini Futures (ES=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.


ES=FCL=FDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.83

1.15

-0.32

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.28

1.74

-0.46

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.24

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.36

2.91

-1.55

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

6.06

4.83

+1.24

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

The current ES=F Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is comparable to the CL=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ES=F and CL=F, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ES=FCL=FDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

1.15

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

0.33

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

0.24

+0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.08

+0.28

Correlation

The correlation between ES=F and CL=F is 0.14, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Drawdowns

ES=F vs. CL=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ES=F drawdown since its inception was -57.11%, smaller than the maximum CL=F drawdown of -92.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ES=F and CL=F.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


ES=FCL=FDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-57.11%

-92.04%

+34.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-27.07%

+18.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.02%

-53.86%

+28.84%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.45%

-84.82%

+50.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.59%

-22.87%

+17.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.56%

-40.84%

+28.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.01%

16.32%

-14.31%

Volatility

ES=F vs. CL=F - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for S&P 500 E-Mini Futures (ES=F) is 5.00%, while Crude Oil WTI (CL=F) has a volatility of 28.87%. This indicates that ES=F experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CL=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


ES=FCL=FDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.00%

28.87%

-23.87%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.75%

34.98%

-26.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.09%

42.54%

-25.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.48%

36.87%

-20.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.61%

48.84%

-31.23%