SCO vs. UNL
SCO (ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil) and UNL (United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP) are both Oil & Gas funds - SCO tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (-200%) while UNL tracks the 12 Month Natural Gas. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SCO returned -40.39%/yr vs -5.20%/yr for UNL. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. SCO charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for UNL.
Performance
SCO vs. UNL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SCO achieves a -65.39% return, which is significantly lower than UNL's -18.52% return. Over the past 10 years, SCO has underperformed UNL with an annualized return of -40.39%, while UNL has yielded a comparatively higher -5.20% 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%
UNL
- 1D
- 0.56%
- 1M
- -5.15%
- 6M
- -30.80%
- YTD
- -18.52%
- 1Y
- -25.95%
- 3Y*
- -18.51%
- 5Y*
- -11.19%
- 10Y*
- -5.20%
- ALL TIME*
- -12.56%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $131.70M | $126.01M | $253.57M | |
| $226.03K | $285.73K | $439.49K |
SCO vs. UNL - 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% |
UNL United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP | -18.52% | -9.67% | -4.78% | -50.20% | 47.01% | 54.42% | -9.54% | -18.78% | 12.53% | -21.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between SCO and UNL is -0.25, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.15 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | -0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2010 | -0.13 |
The correlation between SCO and UNL shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to -0.13 (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. UNL — Risk / Return Rank
SCO
UNL
SCO vs. UNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) and United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL). 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 | UNL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 0.89 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.78 | -0.76 | -0.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.32 | -1.30 | -0.03 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SCO vs. UNL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SCO drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, which is greater than UNL's maximum drawdown of -89.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCO and UNL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SCO | UNL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.80% | -89.48% | -10.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -72.24% | -33.33% | -38.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -74.64% | -50.42% | -24.22% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -94.80% | -79.07% | -15.73% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.50% | -79.07% | -20.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.77% | -89.35% | -10.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.28% | -73.49% | -11.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 42.39% | 19.53% | +22.86% |
Volatility
SCO vs. UNL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) has a higher volatility of 23.27% compared to United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) at 5.25%. This indicates that SCO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UNL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SCO | UNL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 23.27% | 5.25% | +18.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 51.24% | 26.04% | +25.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.66% | 34.75% | +24.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 60.43% | 41.70% | +18.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 71.89% | 33.81% | +38.08% |
SCO vs. UNL - Expense Ratio Comparison
SCO has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UNL's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
SCO vs. UNL - Dividend Comparison
Neither SCO nor UNL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SCO and UNL have a correlation of -0.25, 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 UNL (5.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCO dropped -99.80% vs UNL's -89.48%.
On 10-year performance, UNL leads with -5.20% vs -40.39% for SCO. On fees, UNL is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, UNL has been the lower-risk option at 5.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, UNL has performed better with a -5.20% return vs -40.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UNL is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SCO.
SCO and UNL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
SCO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (-200%), while UNL tracks 12 Month Natural Gas. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for SCO and 0.90% for UNL.
UNL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.73 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 UNL
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