USO ranks 4th and UNL 11th of 11 funds in the Energy Futures Category.
UNL vs USO
USO −0.79pt a year
1.65%0.86%
USO 104.2×the volume
55K5.73M
USO +13.9pt
−6.7%+7.2%
UNL vs USO Performance
−63.8%+195.4%
- UNL 1.65%
- USO 0.86%, better
- UNL $14M
- USO $1.95B
- UNL −36.1%
- USO +132.7%, better
- UNL 16
- USO 17
- UNL 55K sh
- USO 5.73M sh, better
- UNL $5.17
- USO $170.39
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | UNL | USO |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | F12 | B65Higher |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | F23 | C43Higher |
| Tradability | D31 | A70Higher |
| Holdings | A100 | |
| Durability | C40 | A71Higher |
Rank among Energy Futures funds
Same Category. UNL and USO are both graded against the same 11 Energy Futures funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
UNLF
USOB
In short
UNL Natural gas without the front-month tunnel vision. Since 2009, UNL has tracked an equally weighted ladder of 12 consecutive NYMEX gas futures, spreading the roll across a year instead of riding the next contract alone.
USO The original US crude oil ETF, trading since 2006 and still one of the busiest ways to get WTI exposure without opening a futures account. It holds oil futures near the front of the curve, not barrels in a tank.
Stated mandate
UNL UNL seeks to reflect changes in the spot price of natural gas delivered at Henry Hub, Louisiana, using an equally weighted average of 12 consecutive natural-gas futures contracts, plus collateral interest and less expenses.
USO USO seeks daily NAV percentage changes that reflect changes in the spot price of light, sweet crude oil delivered to Cushing, Oklahoma, measured by the Benchmark Oil Futures Contract, plus collateral interest and less expenses.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
UNL vs USO Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
UNL vs USO Cost
Overpaying UNL vs USO
$11,998
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
UNL 1.65%
$28,366
USO 0.86%
$16,368
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | UNL | USO | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $2,831 | $1,525 | $1,306 |
| 20 | $10,338 | $5,768 | $4,570 |
| 30 | $28,366 | $16,368 | $11,998 |
- 1.65%UNL
- 0.86%USO, cheaper
- Middle half of Energy Futures funds
- Median 1.01%
USO 4th cheapest of 11 funds
UNL 10th cheapest of 11 funds
UNL vs USO Dividends
- UNL None
- USO None
Distribution history
UNL vs USO Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- UNL
- USO
Risk facts
- Volatility
- UNL 28.9%, betterUSO 43.1%
- Return per unit of risk
- UNL −0.95USO 0.71, better
- Worst fall
- UNL −81.8%USO −36.2%, better
- Market sensitivity
- UNL 1.01USO 2.22
UNL and USO in the news
Popular comparisons
- 1.65% · 0.70%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.86% · 0.70%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.65% · 0.79%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.86% · 0.79%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.65% · 0.81%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.86% · 0.81%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.





