SCO vs. GLL
SCO (ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil) and GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) are both exchange-traded funds - SCO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (-200%), while GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SCO returned -40.39%/yr vs -20.49%/yr for GLL. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
SCO vs. GLL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SCO achieves a -65.39% return, which is significantly lower than GLL's 1.34% return. Over the past 10 years, SCO has underperformed GLL with an annualized return of -40.39%, while GLL has yielded a comparatively higher -20.49% annualized return.
SCO
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- -23.78%
- 6M
- -55.81%
- YTD
- -65.39%
- 1Y
- -58.66%
- 3Y*
- -29.81%
- 5Y*
- -39.67%
- 10Y*
- -40.39%
- ALL TIME*
- -26.09%
GLL
- 1D
- 3.15%
- 1M
- 3.39%
- 6M
- 33.97%
- YTD
- 1.34%
- 1Y
- -39.14%
- 3Y*
- -38.51%
- 5Y*
- -27.47%
- 10Y*
- -20.49%
- ALL TIME*
- -21.77%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $38.26M | $37.47M | $59.93M | |
| $131.70M | $126.01M | $253.57M |
SCO vs. GLL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SCO ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil | -65.39% | 15.90% | -19.00% | -12.41% | -62.59% | -72.62% | -4.20% | -58.50% | 19.22% | -22.40% |
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 1.34% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between SCO and GLL is -0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.08 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.13 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2008 | 0.15 |
The correlation between SCO and GLL shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.15 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
SCO vs. GLL — Risk / Return Rank
SCO
GLL
SCO vs. GLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) and ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| SCO | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.43 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 0.88 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.78 | -0.65 | -0.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.32 | -0.94 | -0.38 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SCO vs. GLL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SCO drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, roughly equal to the maximum GLL drawdown of -99.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCO and GLL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SCO | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.80% | -99.24% | -0.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -72.24% | -64.23% | -8.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -74.64% | -87.95% | +13.31% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -94.80% | -89.76% | -5.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.50% | -95.76% | -3.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.77% | -98.74% | -1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.28% | -85.23% | -0.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 42.39% | 44.60% | -2.21% |
Volatility
SCO vs. GLL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) has a higher volatility of 23.27% compared to ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) at 12.63%. This indicates that SCO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SCO | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 23.27% | 12.63% | +10.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 51.24% | 45.01% | +6.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.66% | 55.39% | +4.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 60.43% | 36.88% | +23.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 71.89% | 32.48% | +39.41% |
SCO vs. GLL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both SCO and GLL have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
SCO vs. GLL - Dividend Comparison
Neither SCO nor GLL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SCO and GLL have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCO has higher volatility (23.27%) compared to GLL (12.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCO dropped -99.80% vs GLL's -99.24%.
On 10-year performance, GLL leads with -20.49% vs -40.39% for SCO. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, GLL has been the lower-risk option at 12.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GLL has performed better with a -20.49% return vs -40.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCO and GLL have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
SCO and GLL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
SCO is categorized as Oil & Gas, while GLL is Leveraged Commodities. SCO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (-200%), while GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%).
GLL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.75 vs -0.94), 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.
Find the right allocation for SCO and GLL
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