FANG vs. CL=F
Compare and contrast key facts about Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) and Crude Oil WTI (CL=F).
Performance
FANG vs. CL=F - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FANG vs. CL=F - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FANG Diamondback Energy, Inc. | 27.56% | -5.64% | 10.35% | 19.66% | 35.34% | 127.51% | -46.00% | 0.92% | -26.35% | 24.93% |
CL=F Crude Oil WTI | 72.26% | -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, FANG achieves a 27.56% return, which is significantly lower than CL=F's 72.26% return. Over the past 10 years, FANG has outperformed CL=F with an annualized return of 12.44%, while CL=F has yielded a comparatively lower 10.40% annualized return.
FANG
- 1D
- -3.63%
- 1M
- 7.15%
- YTD
- 27.56%
- 6M
- 34.51%
- 1Y
- 21.73%
- 3Y*
- 16.36%
- 5Y*
- 23.73%
- 10Y*
- 12.44%
CL=F
- 1D
- -2.44%
- 1M
- 38.86%
- YTD
- 72.26%
- 6M
- 60.10%
- 1Y
- 38.92%
- 3Y*
- 9.28%
- 5Y*
- 9.98%
- 10Y*
- 10.40%
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
FANG vs. CL=F — Risk / Return Rank
FANG
CL=F
FANG vs. CL=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) 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.
| FANG | CL=F | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.56 | 0.83 | -0.27 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.98 | 1.35 | -0.37 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.18 | -0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.86 | 2.08 | -1.22 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.18 | 3.45 | -1.28 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FANG | CL=F | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 | 0.83 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 | 0.26 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 | 0.20 | +0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 0.07 | +0.39 |
Correlation
The correlation between FANG and CL=F is 0.52, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Drawdowns
FANG vs. CL=F - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FANG drawdown since its inception was -88.72%, roughly equal to the maximum CL=F drawdown of -92.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FANG and CL=F.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FANG | CL=F | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.72% | -92.04% | +3.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.16% | -27.07% | +0.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.10% | -53.86% | +11.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -88.72% | -84.82% | -3.90% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.72% | -31.92% | +26.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.57% | -40.84% | +21.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.33% | 16.32% | -5.99% |
Volatility
FANG vs. CL=F - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) is 8.16%, while Crude Oil WTI (CL=F) has a volatility of 27.34%. This indicates that FANG 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
| FANG | CL=F | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.16% | 27.34% | -19.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.91% | 33.40% | -12.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.22% | 41.12% | -1.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 38.39% | 36.54% | +1.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 48.95% | 48.71% | +0.24% |