PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
UNL vs. LEAD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

UNL vs. LEAD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UNL (United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP) and LEAD (Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UNL is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the 12 Month Natural Gas, while LEAD is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UNL returned -3.81%/yr vs 14.71%/yr for LEAD. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UNL charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for LEAD.

Performance

UNL vs. LEAD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) and Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UNL achieves a -11.00% return, which is significantly lower than LEAD's 15.75% return. Over the past 10 years, UNL has underperformed LEAD with an annualized return of -3.81%, while LEAD has yielded a comparatively higher 14.71% annualized return.

UNL

1D
1.21%
1M
-1.96%
YTD
-11.00%
6M
-23.47%
1Y
-28.37%
3Y*
-14.70%
5Y*
-5.77%
10Y*
-3.81%

LEAD

1D
0.48%
1M
4.84%
YTD
15.75%
6M
14.25%
1Y
25.56%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
12.16%
10Y*
14.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UNL vs. LEAD - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UNL
United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP		-11.00%-9.67%-4.78%-50.20%47.01%54.42%-9.54%-18.78%12.53%-21.47%
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF		15.75%15.52%10.32%26.25%-18.16%29.69%23.41%33.75%-6.63%24.89%

Correlation

The correlation between UNL and LEAD is -0.29, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.06

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2016

0.03

The correlation between UNL and LEAD shifts across timeframes, from -0.29 (1 year) to 0.04 (5 years), 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.

United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP

Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF

Often compared with UNL:
UNL vs. UNGUNL vs. BOILUNL vs. FCGUNL vs. DIGUNL vs. KOLDUNL vs. XELAUNL vs. BNO
Often compared with LEAD:
LEAD vs. SPYLEAD vs. VIGLEAD vs. SCHDLEAD vs. DSTLLEAD vs. DGROLEAD vs. TDIVLEAD vs. VOO

Return for Risk

UNL vs. LEAD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
UNL
UNL Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
UNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
UNL Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
UNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
UNL Martin Ratio Rank: 33
Martin Ratio Rank
LEAD
LEAD Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
LEAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEAD Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
LEAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEAD Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

UNL vs. LEAD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) and Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD). 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.

UNLLEADDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.79
1.77

-2.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.97
2.47

-3.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.87

1.31

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.81

2.97

-3.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.30

12.66

-13.96

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UNL vs. LEAD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UNL Sharpe Ratio is -0.79, which is lower than the LEAD Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UNL and LEAD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

UNLLEADDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.79

1.77

-2.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.14

0.71

-0.84

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.11

0.79

-0.90

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.40

0.80

-1.20

Drawdowns

UNL vs. LEAD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UNL drawdown since its inception was -89.00%, which is greater than LEAD's maximum drawdown of -32.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNL and LEAD.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

UNLLEADDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.00%

-32.19%

-56.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-35.11%

-8.65%

-26.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.16%

-17.86%

-30.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-78.12%

-24.93%

-53.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-78.12%

-32.19%

-45.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-88.37%

0.00%

-88.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-73.36%

-4.42%

-68.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.92%

2.02%

+19.90%

Volatility

UNL vs. LEAD - Volatility Comparison

United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) has a higher volatility of 8.36% compared to Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) at 4.12%. This indicates that UNL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LEAD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

UNLLEADDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.36%

4.12%

+4.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.00%

11.33%

+20.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.82%

14.56%

+21.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

41.76%

17.34%

+24.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.84%

18.65%

+15.19%

UNL vs. LEAD - Expense Ratio Comparison

UNL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than LEAD's 0.43% expense ratio.

Dividends

UNL vs. LEAD - Dividend Comparison

UNL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LEAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF		0.58%0.70%0.93%1.13%1.27%1.79%0.81%1.32%1.38%0.97%1.38%
UNL
United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

UNL and LEAD have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UNL has higher volatility (8.36%) compared to LEAD (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNL dropped -89.00% vs LEAD's -32.19%.

On 10-year performance, LEAD leads with 14.71% vs -3.81% for UNL. On fees, LEAD is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, LEAD has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 14.71% return vs -3.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LEAD is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for UNL.

LEAD has the higher dividend yield at 0.58%, compared with 0.00% for UNL.

UNL is categorized as Oil & Gas, while LEAD is Large Cap Growth Equities. UNL tracks 12 Month Natural Gas, while LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: Concierge Technologies and SRN Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for UNL and 0.43% for LEAD.

LEAD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs -0.79), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UNL and LEAD

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