OIH vs. CL=F

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OIH (VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF) is Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Oil Services 25 Index, while CL=F (Crude Oil WTI) is an asset. Over the past 10 years, OIH returned -0.90%/yr vs 7.06%/yr for CL=F. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

OIH vs. CL=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) 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, OIH achieves a 51.43% return, which is significantly lower than CL=F's 67.54% return. Over the past 10 years, OIH has underperformed CL=F with an annualized return of -0.90%, while CL=F has yielded a comparatively higher 7.06% annualized return.

OIH

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -2.77%
• YTD: 51.43%
• 6M: 43.87%
• 1Y: 92.96%
• 3Y*: 18.56%
• 5Y*: 13.62%
• 10Y*: -0.90%

CL=F

• 1D: 2.60%
• 1M: -9.60%
• YTD: 67.54%
• 6M: 63.19%
• 1Y: 51.71%
• 3Y*: 10.22%
• 5Y*: 6.75%
• 10Y*: 7.06%

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

OIH vs. CL=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
OIH VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF	51.43%	6.81%	-10.53%	3.20%	66.17%	21.22%	-41.19%	-3.54%	-45.03%	-19.66%
CL=F Crude Oil WTI	67.54%	-19.41%	-0.82%	-10.70%	7.44%	53.98%	-19.98%	32.92%	-24.35%	12.51%

Correlation

The correlation between OIH and CL=F is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2001	0.48

The correlation between OIH and CL=F shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.54 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

OIH vs. CL=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

OIH

OIH Risk / Return Rank: 89
OIH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
OIH Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
OIH Omega Ratio Rank: 79
OIH Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
OIH Martin Ratio Rank: 93

CL=F

CL=F Risk / Return Rank: 35
CL=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
CL=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
CL=F Omega Ratio Rank: 30
CL=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
CL=F Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) 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.

	OIH	CL=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	0.93	+2.25
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.87	1.42	+2.45
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.22	+0.26
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.80	1.70	+8.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	24.42	2.77	+21.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OIH vs. CL=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OIH Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is higher than the CL=F Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OIH 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

	OIH	CL=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.19	0.93	+2.25
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	0.16	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.02	0.14	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.01	0.07	-0.06

Drawdowns

OIH vs. CL=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OIH drawdown since its inception was -94.45%, roughly equal to the maximum CL=F drawdown of -92.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OIH and CL=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	OIH	CL=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.45%	-92.04%	-2.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-27.07%	+17.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.80%	-39.46%	-4.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.80%	-53.86%	+10.06%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.62%	-84.82%	-4.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-61.60%	-33.79%	-27.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.84%	-40.81%	-8.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.82%	12.27%	-8.45%

Volatility

OIH vs. CL=F - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) is 7.95%, while Crude Oil WTI (CL=F) has a volatility of 17.01%. This indicates that OIH 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.

Volatility by Period

	OIH	CL=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.95%	17.01%	-9.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.36%	46.49%	-26.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.49%	49.26%	-19.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.79%	38.90%	-2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.41%	49.55%	-7.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

OIH and CL=F have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OIH or CL=F?

CL=F has higher volatility (17.01%) compared to OIH (7.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OIH dropped -94.45% vs CL=F's -92.04%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OIH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 0.93), 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.