United States 12 Month Oil Fund, LP

Previous wording

USCF believes that market arbitrage opportunities will cause daily changes in USL’s share price on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis to closely track daily changes in USL’s per share NAV on a percentage basis. USCF further believes that daily changes in prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts have historically tracked the daily changes in spot prices of light, sweet crude oil. USCF believes that the net effect of these relationships will be that the daily changes in the price of USL’s shares on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis will closely track the daily changes in the spot price of a barrel of light, sweet crude oil on a percentage basis, plus interest earned on USL’s collateral holdings, less USL’s expenses.

Current wording

USCF believes that market arbitrage opportunities will cause daily changes in USL’s share price on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis to closely track daily changes in USL’s per share NAV on a percentage basis. USCF further believes that the daily changes in prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts have historically tracked the daily changes in spot prices of light, sweet crude oil. USCF believes that the net effect of these relationships will be that daily changes in the price of USL’s shares on the NYSE Arca on a percentage basis will closely track the daily changes in the spot price of a barrel of light, sweet crude oil on a percentage basis, plus interest earned on USL’s collateral holdings, less USL’s expenses.

Previous wording

Exchange Accountability Levels, Position Limits and Price Fluctuation Limits. Designated contract markets (“DCMs”), such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures, have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short futures contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by USL is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the futures contracts that USL invests in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, the NYMEX and ICE Futures may also set daily price limits on futures contracts. The daily price fluctuation limit establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price. Once the daily price fluctuation limit has been reached in a particular futures contract, no trades may be made at a price beyond that limit.

Current wording

Designated contract markets (“DCMs”), such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures, have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short futures contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by USL is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the futures contracts that USL invests in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, the NYMEX and ICE Futures may also set daily price limits on futures contracts. The daily price fluctuation limit establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price. Once the daily price fluctuation limit has been reached in a particular futures contract, no trades may be made at a price beyond that limit.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2026, USL held 758 futures contracts for light, sweet crude oil traded on the NYMEX and did not hold any Oil Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For the three months ended March 31, 2026, USL did not exceed the accountability levels imposed by the NYMEX or ICE Futures, however, the aggregated total of certain of the Related Public Funds did exceed the accountability levels. No action was taken by NYMEX and USL did not reduce the number of Oil Futures Contracts held as a result.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2026, USL did hold 597 futures contracts for light, sweet crude oil traded on the NYMEX and did not hold any Oil Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For the six months ended June 30, 2026, USL did not exceed the accountability levels imposed by the NYMEX or ICE Futures, however, the aggregated total of certain of the Related Public Funds did exceed the accountability levels. No action was taken by NYMEX and USL did not reduce the number of Oil Futures Contracts held as a result.

Previous wording

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot allow such limits to be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that USL will run up against such position limits because USL’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire and the eleven following months to the next month contract to expire and the eleven following months during a one day each month. The foregoing accountability levels and position limits are subject to change. For the three months ended March 31, 2026, USL did not exceed any position limits.

Current wording

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot allow such limits to be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that USL will run up against such position limits because USL’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire and the eleven following months to the next month contract to expire and the eleven following months during a one day each month. The foregoing accountability levels and position limits are subject to change. For the six months ended June 30, 2026, USL did not exceed any position limits.

Previous wording

Crude oil futures prices were volatile during the three months ended March 31, 2026. The average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts started the period at $57.04 per barrel. The high of the period was on March 20, 2026 when the average price reached $83.38 per barrel. The average low for the period was on January 7, 2026, which was $55.85 per barrel. The period ended with the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at $78.77 per barrel, an increase of approximately 38.10% over the period. USL’s per share NAV began the period at $33.31 and ended the period at $47.79 on March 31, 2026, an increase of approximately 43.47% over the period. The average Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts prices listed above began with the February 2026 to January 2027 contracts and ended with the May 2026 to April 2027 contracts. The increase of approximately 38.10% on the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts listed above is a hypothetical return only and would not actually be realized by an investor holding Oil Futures Contracts. An investment in Oil Futures Contracts would need to be rolled forward during the time period described in order to simulate such a result. Furthermore, the change in the nominal price of these differing Oil Futures Contracts, measured from the start of the year to the end of the year, does not represent the actual benchmark results that USL seeks to track, which are more fully described below in the section titled*“Tracking USL’s Benchmark.”*

Current wording

Crude oil futures prices were volatile during the six months ended June 30, 2026. The average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts started the period at $57.04 per barrel. The high of the period was on May 4, 2026 when the average price reached $87.65 per barrel. The average low for the period was on January 7, 2026, which was $55.85 per barrel. The period ended with the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at $67.91 per barrel, an increase of approximately 19.06% over the period. USL’s per share NAV began the period at $33.31 and ended the period at $45.08 on June 30, 2026, an increase of approximately 35.33% over the period. The average Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts prices listed above began with the February 2026 to January 2027 contracts and ended with the August 2026 to July 2027 contracts. The increase of approximately 19.06% on the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Oil Futures Contracts. An investment in Oil Futures Contracts would need to be rolled forward during the time period described in order to simulate such a result. Furthermore, the change in the nominal price of these differing Oil Futures Contracts, measured from the start of the year to the end of the year, does not represent the actual benchmark results that USL seeks to track, which are more fully described below in the section titled*“Tracking USL’s Benchmark.”*

Previous wording

During the three months ended March 31, 2026, the crude oil futures market was in a state of backwardation. On days when the market was in contango the price of the near month crude Oil Futures Contract is lower than the price of the next month crude Oil Futures Contract, or contracts further away from expiration. On days when the market is in backwardation, the price of the near month crude Oil Futures Contract is higher than the price of the next month crude Oil Futures Contract or contracts further away from expiration. For a discussion of the impact of backwardation and contango on total returns, see*“Term Structure of Crude Oil Prices and the Impact on Total Returns”* below.

Current wording

During the six months ended June 30, 2026, the crude oil futures market was in a state of backwardation. On days when the market was in contango the price of the near month crude Oil Futures Contract is lower than the price of the next month crude Oil Futures Contract, or contracts further away from expiration. On days when the market is in backwardation, the price of the near month crude Oil Futures Contract is higher than the price of the next month crude Oil Futures Contract or contracts further away from expiration. For a discussion of the impact of backwardation and contango on total returns, see*“Term Structure of Crude Oil Prices and the Impact on Total Returns”* below.

Previous wording

Results of Operations. As of March 31st, 2026, USL had issued 1,250,000 shares outstanding. On April 28, 2023, the SEC declared effective a registration statement filed by USL that registered an unlimited number of shares. As a result, USL has an unlimited number of shares that can be issued in the form of Creation Baskets. More shares may have been issued by USL than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares.

Current wording

Results of Operations. As of June 30, 2026, USL had issued 900,000 shares outstanding. On April 28, 2023, the SEC declared effective a registration statement filed by USL that registered an unlimited number of shares. As a result, USL has an unlimited number of shares that can be issued in the form of Creation Baskets. More shares may have been issued by USL than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares.

Previous wording

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by USL, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the three months ended March 31, 2026, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. As a result, the amount of income earned by USL as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the three months ended March 31, 2026, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. To the degree that the aggregate yield is lower, the net expense ratio, inclusive of income, will be higher.

Current wording

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by USL, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. As a result, the amount of income earned by USL as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. To the degree that the aggregate yield is higher, the net expense ratio, inclusive of income, will be lower.

Previous wording

The decrease in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2026, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, was due primarily to a decrease in professional fees.

Current wording

The increase in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025, was due primarily to a increase in professional fees and higher brokerage commissions.

Previous wording

The increase in total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended March 31, 2026, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, was due primarily to a higher number of Oil Futures Contracts being held and traded.

Current wording

The increase in total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025, was due primarily to a higher of Oil Futures Contracts being held and traded.

Previous wording

USCF seeks to manage USL’s portfolio such that changes in its average daily per share NAV, on a percentage basis, closely track the daily changes in the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, also on a percentage basis. Specifically, USCF seeks to manage the portfolio such that over any rolling period of 30-valuation days, the average daily change in USL’s per share NAV is within a range of 90% to 110% (0.9 to 1.1) of the average daily change in the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts. As an example, if the average daily movement of the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts for a particular 30-valuation

Current wording

USCF seeks to manage USL’s portfolio such that changes in its average daily per share NAV, on a percentage basis, closely track the daily changes in the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, also on a percentage basis. Specifically, USCF seeks to manage the portfolio such that over any rolling period of 30-valuation days, the average daily change in USL’s per share NAV is within a range of 90% to 110% (0.9 to 1.1) of the average daily change in the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts. As an example, if the average daily movement of the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts for a particular 30-valuation day time period was 0.50% per day, USCF would attempt to manage the portfolio such that the average daily movement of the per share NAV during that same time period fell between 0.45% and 0.55% (i.e., between 0.9 and 1.1 of the benchmark’s results). USL’s portfolio management goals do not include trying to make the nominal price of USL’s per share NAV equal to the average of the nominal prices of the current Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts or the spot price for light, sweet crude oil. USCF believes that it is not practical to manage the portfolio to achieve such an investment goal when investing in Oil Futures Contracts and Other Oil-Related Investments.

Previous wording

For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2026, the average daily change in the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts was 0.986%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of USL over the same time period was 0.996%. The average daily difference was 0.010% (or 1 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period USL’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Current wording

For the 30-valuation days ended June 30, 2026, the average daily change in the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts was (0.672)%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of USL over the same time period was (0.662)%. The average daily difference was 0.010% (or 1.0 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period USL’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Previous wording

Since the commencement of the offering of USL’s shares to the public on December 6, 2007 to March 31, 2026, the average daily change in the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts was 0.019%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of USL over the same time period was 0.021%. The average daily difference was 0.002% (or 0.2 basis points, where 1.0 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period USL’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Current wording

Since the commencement of the offering of USL’s shares to the public on December 6, 2007 to June 30, 2026, the average daily change in the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts was 0.018%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of USL over the same time period was 0.020%. The average daily difference was 0.002% (or 0.2 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period USL’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Previous wording

For the three months ended March 31, 2026, the actual total return of USL as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 43.47%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $33.31 as of December 31, 2025 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2026 of $47.79. During this time period, USL made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USL’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, USL would have had an estimated per share NAV of $47.50 as of March 31, 2026, for a total return over the relevant time period of 42.59%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USL of 43.47% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts of 42.59% was a difference over the time period of 0.88%, which is to say that USL’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage. USL incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of USL to track slightly lower or higher than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Current wording

For the six months ended June 30, 2026, the actual total return of USL as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 35.33%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $33.31 as of December 31, 2025 and an ending per share NAV as of June 30, 2026 of $45.08. During this time period, USL made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USL’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, USL would have had an estimated per share NAV of $44.53 as of June 30, 2026, for a total return over the relevant time period of 33.70%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USL of 35.33% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts of 33.70% was a difference over the time period of 1.64%, which is to say that USL’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage. USL incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of USL to track slightly lower or higher than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Previous wording

By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, the actual total return of USL as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 0.53%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $38.01 as of December 31, 2024 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2025 of $38.21. During this time period, USL made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USL’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, USL would have had an estimated per share NAV of $37.93 as of March 31, 2025, for a total return over the relevant time period of (0.22)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USL of 0.53% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts of (0.22)% was a difference over the time period of 0.75%, which is to say that USL’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage. USL incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tended to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of USL to track slightly lower or higher than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Current wording

By comparison, for the six months ended June 30, 2025, the actual total return of USL as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (7.42)%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $38.01 as of December 31, 2025 and an ending per share NAV as of June 30, 2026 of $35.19. During this time period, USL made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USL’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, USL would have had an estimated per share NAV of $34.65 as of June 30, 2025, for a total return over the relevant time period of (8.85)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USL of (7.42)% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts of (8.85)% was a difference over the time period of 1.43%, which is to say that USL’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage. USL incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses. The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tended to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of USL to track slightly lower or higher than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Previous wording

First, USL may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which USL executes the trade. In that case, USL may pay a price that is higher, or lower, than the closing settlement price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, which could cause the changes in the daily per share NAV of USL to either be high or low relative to the daily changes in the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts. During the three months ended March 31, 2026, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price. However, it may not always be possible for USL to obtain the settlement price and there is no assurance that failure to obtain the closing settlement price in the future will not adversely impact USL’s attempt to track the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Current wording

First, USL may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which USL executes the trade. In that case, USL may pay a price that is higher, or lower, than the closing settlement price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts, which could cause the changes in the daily per share NAV of USL to either be high or low relative to the daily changes in the average of the prices of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts. During the six months ended June 30, 2026, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price. However, it may not always be possible for USL to obtain the settlement price and there is no assurance that failure to obtain the closing settlement price in the future will not adversely impact USL’s attempt to track the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts.

Previous wording

Historically, the crude oil futures markets have experienced periods of contango and backwardation, with backwardation being in place somewhat less often than contango since oil futures trading started in 1983. Following the global financial crisis in the fourth quarter of 2008, the crude oil market moved into contango and remained primarily in contango until 2013. In late 2014, global crude oil inventories grew rapidly after OPEC voted to defend its market share against U.S. shale-oil producers, resulting in another multi-year period during which the crude oil market remained primarily in contango. In March 2020, contango dramatically increased and reached historic levels during the economic crisis arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, related supply chain disruptions and disputes among oil producing countries over the potential limits on the production of crude oil, and a corresponding collapse in demand for crude oil and a lack of on-land storage for crude oil. This level of contango was due to significant market volatility that occurred in crude oil markets as well as oil futures markets. Crude oil prices collapsed in the wake of the COVID-19 demand shock, which reduced global petroleum consumption, and the price war launched by Saudi Arabia at the beginning of March 2020 in response to Russia’s unwillingness to participate in extending previously agreed upon supply cuts. An estimated twenty million barrels a day of crude demand evaporated as a result of quarantines and massive drops in industrial and manufacturing activity. Eventually, the United States, OPEC, Russia, and other oil producers around the world agreed to a historic 9.7 million barrel per day cut to crude supply. The supply cut along with the partial reopening of economies during the third quarter of 2020 reduced some of the unprecedented volatility that oil markets experienced in the Spring of 2020. Likewise, contango returned to moderate levels in May of 2020. During the three months ended March 31, 2026, crude oil futures were in a state of contango as measured by the difference between the front month and the second month contract.

Current wording

Historically, the crude oil futures markets have experienced periods of contango and backwardation, with backwardation being in place somewhat less often than contango since oil futures trading started in 1983. Following the global financial crisis in the fourth quarter of 2008, the crude oil market moved into contango and remained primarily in contango until 2013. In late 2014, global crude oil inventories grew rapidly after OPEC voted to defend its market share against U.S. shale-oil producers, resulting in another multi-year period during which the crude oil market remained primarily in contango. In March 2020, contango dramatically increased and reached historic levels during the economic crisis arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, related supply chain disruptions and disputes among oil producing countries over the potential limits on the production of crude oil, and a corresponding collapse in demand for crude oil and a lack of on-land storage for crude oil. This level of contango was due to significant market volatility that occurred in crude oil markets as well as oil futures markets. Crude oil prices collapsed in the wake of the COVID-19 demand shock, which reduced global petroleum consumption, and the price war launched by Saudi Arabia at the beginning of March 2020 in response to Russia’s unwillingness to participate in extending previously agreed upon supply cuts. An estimated twenty million barrels a day of crude demand evaporated as a result of quarantines and massive drops in industrial and manufacturing activity. Eventually, the United States, OPEC, Russia, and other oil producers around the world agreed to a historic 9.7 million barrel per day cut to crude supply. The supply cut along with the partial reopening of economies during the third quarter of 2020 reduced some of the unprecedented volatility that oil markets experienced in the Spring of 2020. Likewise, contango returned to moderate levels in May of 2020. During the six months ended June 30, 2026, crude oil futures were in a state of contango as measured by the difference between the front month and the second month contract.

Previous wording

differently by the price relationship between different contract months of the same commodity future compared to the total return of a portfolio consisting of the near month contract. USCF believes that based on historical evidence a portfolio that held futures contracts with a range of expiration dates spread out over a 12 month period of time would typically be impacted less by the positive effect of backwardation, and less by the negative effect of contango, compared to a portfolio that held contracts of a single near month. As a result, absent the impact of any other factors, a portfolio of 12 different monthly contracts would tend to have a lower total return than a near month only portfolio in a backwardation market and a higher total return in a contango market. However, there can be no assurance that such historical relationships would provide the same or similar results in the future.

Current wording

USCF believes that holding futures contracts whose expiration dates are spread out over a 12 month period of time will cause the total return of such a portfolio to vary compared to a portfolio that holds only a single month’s contract (such as the near month contract). In particular, USCF believes that the total return of a portfolio holding contracts with a range of expiration months will be impacted differently by the price relationship between different contract months of the same commodity future compared to the total return of a portfolio consisting of the near month contract. USCF believes that based on historical evidence a portfolio that held futures contracts with a range of expiration dates spread out over a 12 month period of time would typically be impacted less by the positive effect of backwardation, and less by the negative effect of contango, compared to a portfolio that held contracts of a single near month. As a result, absent the impact of any other factors, a portfolio of 12 different monthly contracts would tend to have a lower total return than a near month only portfolio in a backwardation market and a higher total return in a contango market. However, there can be no assurance that such historical relationships would provide the same or similar results in the future.

Previous wording

Crude Oil Market. During the three months ended March 31, 2026, the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts traded in a range between $55.85 to $83.38. The average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts increased 38.10% from the end of 2025 through March 31, 2026 finishing the quarter at $78.77.

Current wording

Crude Oil Market. During the six months ended June 30, 2026, the average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts traded in a range between $55.85 to $87.65. The average price of the Benchmark Oil Futures Contracts increased 19.06% from the end of 2025 through June 30, 2026 finishing the quarter at $67.91.

Previous wording

The Iran War was the primary driver of crude oil prices during the first quarter of 2026. Global crude oil supply exceeded demand in January and February of 2026. Supply plunged below demand after the start of hostilities and Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which threatens approximately 20% of the world’s oil supply. The U.S. Energy Information Association estimated that Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain collectively shut in 7.5 million barrels per day (mbd) of crude oil production by March 31, 2026. The daily amount of crude oil supply impacted by the war is expected to increase the longer the Strait of Hormuz remains closed and infrastructure in oil producing countries remains offline. U.S. crude oil production averaged approximately 13.7 mbd in the first quarter of 2026, down from an all-time high of 13.8 mbd reached in October of 2025. However, U.S. production has increased significantly over the last five years. OPEC crude production, which had been rising since 2024, dropped significantly from 29.6 mbd in February to 22.1 mbd in March. OPEC output had been rising prior to the war as the cartel continued to gradually unwind voluntary cuts and quotas that were established to support market prices between 2022 and 2024. Russia and OPEC have still not returned to pre-pandemic production levels, while the U.S. has become the world’s largest crude oil producing nation and other oil producing nations have also increased their output. In the U.S., the Trump administration has aggressively called for increased domestic production, and its actions have and will continue to make more drilling possible. However, U.S. drillers have shown restraint in recent years, so production may not rise as much in the future as it has in the recent past. Technology, geology, and economics tend to be larger determinants of U.S. production levels than political policy. The potential impact of the Iran war on producer’s appetites for increased drilling remains uncertain. Other Trump administration policies have introduced uncertainty into crude oil markets, including on-and-off tariffs and tariff threats. The overall impact of the administration’s actions could increase the risk of a global economic slowdown or recession, which could reduce demand for crude oil. Ongoing global tensions, with existing and potential conflicts in various regions, could increase supply disruptions, which could raise prices. Conversely, any resolution of geopolitical conflicts could further ease supply disruptions, sanctions, and price volatility, which could lower prices.

Current wording

U.S. crude oil production remained near record levels, averaging approximately 13.7 mbd in the second quarter of 2026. U.S. production has increased significantly over the last five years. Conversely, Bloomberg data shows that OPEC crude production dropped from 29.6 mbd in February to a low of 16.4 mbd in late spring. OPEC output had been rising prior to the war as the cartel continued to gradually unwind voluntary cuts and quotas that were established to support market prices between 2022 and 2024. Russia and OPEC have still not returned to pre-pandemic production levels, while the U.S. has become the world’s largest crude oil producing nation and other oil producing nations have also increased their output. In the U.S., the Trump administration has encouraged increased domestic production, and its actions may facilitate more drilling activity. However, U.S. drillers have shown restraint in recent years, so production may not rise as much in the future as it has in the recent past. Technology, geology, and economics tend to be significant determinants of U.S. production levels. Increased global demand for U.S. crude, if it is sustained over the long-term, could also motivate increased drilling. Other Trump administration policies have introduced uncertainty into crude oil markets, including tariffs and tariff threats. If the administration’s actions increase the risk of a global economic slowdown or recession, demand for crude oil could decline. Ongoing global tensions, with existing and potential conflicts in various regions, could increase supply disruptions, which could raise prices. Conversely, any resolution of geopolitical conflicts could further ease supply disruptions, sanctions, and price volatility, which could lower prices.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2026, USL held cash deposits and short-term investments in the amount of $11,725,403 with the custodian and FCMs. Some or all of these amounts held by a custodian or an FCM, as applicable, may be subject to loss should USL’s custodian or FCMs, as applicable, cease operations.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2026, USL held cash deposits and short-term investments in the amount of $41,777,134 with the custodian and FCMs. Some or all of these amounts held by a custodian or an FCM, as applicable, may be subject to loss should USL’s custodian or FCMs, as applicable, cease operations.

Previous wording

In addition to USCF’s management fee, USL pays its brokerage fees (including fees to the FCMs), OTC dealer spreads, any licensing fees for the use of intellectual property, and, subsequent to the initial offering, registration and other fees paid to the SEC, FINRA, or other regulatory agencies in connection with the offer and sale of shares, as well as legal, printing, accounting and other expenses associated therewith, and extraordinary expenses. The latter are expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of USLs business, including expenses relating to the indemnification of any person against liabilities and obligations to the extent permitted by law and under the LP Agreement, the bringing or defending of actions in law or in equity or otherwise conducting litigation and incurring legal expenses and the settlement of claims and litigation. Commission payments to an FCM are on a contract-by-contract, or round turn, basis. USL also pays a portion of the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF. See Note 3* to the Notes to Financial Statements (Unaudited) inItem 1* of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

Current wording

In addition to USCF’s management fee, USL pays its brokerage fees (including fees to the FCMs), OTC dealer spreads, any licensing fees for the use of intellectual property, and, subsequent to the initial offering, registration and other fees paid to the SEC, FINRA, or other regulatory agencies in connection with the offer and sale of shares, as well as legal, printing, accounting and other expenses associated therewith, and extraordinary expenses. The latter are expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of USL’s business, including expenses relating to the indemnification of any person against liabilities and obligations to the extent permitted by law and under the LP Agreement, the bringing or defending of actions in law or in equity or otherwise conducting litigation and incurring legal expenses and the settlement of claims and litigation. Commission payments to an FCM are on a contract-by-contract, or round turn, basis. USL also pays a portion of the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF. SeeNote 3to the* Notes to Financial Statements (Unaudited)* inItem 1 of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2026, USL’s portfolio held 758 Crude Oil Futures CL Contracts traded on the NYMEX. As of March 31, 2026, USL did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For a list of USL’s current holdings, please see USL’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2026, USL’s portfolio held 597 Crude Oil Futures CL Contracts traded on the NYMEX. As of June 30, 2026, USL did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures. For a list of USL’s current holdings, please see USL’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com.