UNL vs. UCO

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

UNL (United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP) and UCO (ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil) are both Oil & Gas funds - UNL tracks the 12 Month Natural Gas while UCO tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UNL returned -5.23%/yr vs 21.66%/yr for UCO. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UNL charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for UCO.

Performance

UNL vs. UCO - 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 ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UNL achieves a -18.29% return, which is significantly lower than UCO's 100.52% return. Over the past 10 years, UNL has underperformed UCO with an annualized return of -5.23%, while UCO has yielded a comparatively higher 21.66% annualized return.

UNL

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -5.93%
• 6M: -10.40%
• YTD: -18.29%
• 1Y: -30.69%
• 3Y*: -18.45%
• 5Y*: -9.87%
• 10Y*: -5.23%

UCO

• 1D: 11.74%
• 1M: -7.72%
• 6M: 88.88%
• YTD: 100.52%
• 1Y: 57.67%
• 3Y*: 13.74%
• 5Y*: 14.86%
• 10Y*: 21.66%

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

UNL vs. UCO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UNL United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP	-18.29%	-9.67%	-4.78%	-50.20%	47.01%	54.42%	-9.54%	-18.78%	12.53%	-21.47%
UCO ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil	100.52%	-29.75%	5.36%	-13.89%	39.71%	139.26%	77.27%	53.83%	-43.26%	0.34%

Correlation

The correlation between UNL and UCO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2010	0.13

Return for Risk

UNL vs. UCO — Risk / Return Rank

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

UNL

UNL Risk / Return Rank: 2
UNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
UNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
UNL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
UNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
UNL Martin Ratio Rank: 1

UCO

UCO Risk / Return Rank: 34
UCO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
UCO Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
UCO Omega Ratio Rank: 35
UCO Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
UCO Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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. UCO - 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 ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO). 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.

	UNL	UCO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.88	1.00	-1.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.12	1.58	-2.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.19	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.94	1.50	-2.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.56	3.22	-4.78

UNL vs. UCO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UNL Sharpe Ratio is -0.88, which is lower than the UCO Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UNL and UCO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

UNL vs. UCO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UNL drawdown since its inception was -89.32%, smaller than the maximum UCO drawdown of -99.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNL and UCO.

Drawdown Indicators

	UNL	UCO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.32%	-99.86%	+10.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.78%	-38.55%	+5.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-49.67%	-50.38%	+0.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-78.75%	-67.24%	-11.51%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-78.75%	-96.50%	+17.75%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-89.32%	-84.44%	-4.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-73.43%	-82.12%	+8.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.65%	17.99%	+1.66%

Volatility

UNL vs. UCO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) is 5.82%, while ProShares Ultra Bloomberg Crude Oil (UCO) has a volatility of 21.64%. This indicates that UNL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UCO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UNL	UCO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.82%	21.64%	-15.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.30%	49.97%	-20.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.19%	58.34%	-23.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	41.75%	60.48%	-18.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.84%	317.76%	-283.92%

UNL vs. UCO - Expense Ratio Comparison

UNL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than UCO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

UNL vs. UCO - Dividend Comparison

Neither UNL nor UCO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UNL and UCO in my portfolio?

UNL and UCO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UNL or UCO?

UCO has higher volatility (21.64%) compared to UNL (5.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNL dropped -89.32% vs UCO's -99.86%.

Which ETF is better, UNL or UCO?

On 10-year performance, UCO leads with 21.66% vs -5.23% for UNL. On fees, UNL is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, UNL has been the lower-risk option at 5.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UNL or UCO?

Over the 10-year period, UCO has performed better with a 21.66% return vs -5.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UNL or UCO?

UNL is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for UCO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UNL or UCO?

UNL and UCO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between UNL and UCO?

UNL tracks 12 Month Natural Gas, while UCO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index (200%). They also come from different issuers: Concierge Technologies and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for UNL and 0.95% for UCO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UCO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs -0.88), 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.