News Column

UNITED STATES COMMODITY INDEX FUNDS TRUST - 10-Q - Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

May 12, 2014

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the condensed financial statements and the notes thereto of the United States Commodity Index Funds Trust (the "Trust") included elsewhere in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q. Forward-Looking Information

This quarterly report on Form 10-Q, including this "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations," contains forward-looking statements regarding the plans and objectives of management for future operations. This information may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Trust's actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements, which involve assumptions and describe the Trust's future plans, strategies and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words "may," "will," "should," "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "believe," "intend" or "project," the negative of these words, other variations on these words or comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements are based on assumptions that may be incorrect, and the Trust cannot assure investors that the projections included in these forward-looking statements will come to pass. The Trust's actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. The Trust has based the forward-looking statements included in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q on information available to it on the date of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, and the Trust assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Although the Trust undertakes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, investors are advised to consult any additional disclosures that the Trust may make directly to them or through reports that the Trust in the future files with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K. Introduction The United States Commodity Index Fund ("USCI"), the United States Copper Index Fund ("CPER"), the United States Agriculture Index Fund ("USAG") and the United States Metals Index Fund ("USMI") are each a commodity pool that issues shares representing fractional undivided beneficial interests in USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI, respectively ("shares"), that may be purchased and sold on the NYSE Arca, Inc. (the "NYSE Arca"). USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI are series of the Trust, a Delaware statutory trust formed on December 21, 2009. USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI are collectively referred to herein as the "Trust Series." The Trust and each Trust Series operate pursuant to the Trust's Third Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust and Trust Agreement (the "Trust Agreement"), dated March 22, 2013. Wilmington Trust Company (the "Trustee"), a Delaware banking corporation, is the Delaware trustee of the Trust. The Trust and each Trust Series are managed and controlled by United States Commodity Funds LLC ("USCF").



United States Commodity Index Fund

USCI invests in futures contracts for commodities that are traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange (the "NYMEX"), ICE Futures ("ICE Futures"), Chicago Board of Trade ("CBOT"), Chicago Mercantile Exchange ("CME"), London Metal Exchange ("LME"), Commodity Exchange, Inc. ("COMEX") or on other domestic or foreign exchanges (such exchanges, collectively, the "Futures Exchanges") (such futures contracts, collectively, "Futures Contracts") and, to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, other commodity-based contracts and instruments such as cash-settled options on Futures Contracts, forward contracts relating to commodities, cleared swap contracts and other over-the-counter transactions that are based on the price of commodities and Futures Contracts (collectively, "Other Commodity-Related Investments"). Market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause USCI to invest in Other Commodity Related Investments would be those allowing USCI to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. 47 The investment objective of USCI is for the daily changes in percentage terms of its shares' per share net asset value ("NAV") to reflect the daily changes in percentage terms of the SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity Index Total ReturnSM (the "SDCI"), less USCI's expenses. USCF does not intend to operate USCI in a fashion such that its per share NAV will equal, in dollar terms, the spot prices of the commodities underlying the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts (as defined below) that comprise the SDCI or the prices of any particular group of Futures Contracts. The SDCI is owned and maintained by SummerHaven Index Management, LLC ("SummerHaven Indexing") and calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. The SDCI is comprised of fourteen Futures Contracts that are selected on a monthly basis from a list of twenty-seven possible Futures Contracts. The Futures Contracts that at any given time make up the SDCI are referred to herein as "Benchmark Component Futures Contracts." USCI invests first in the current Benchmark Component Futures Contracts and other Futures Contracts intended to replicate the return on the current Benchmark Component Futures Contracts and, thereafter may hold Futures Contracts in a particular commodity other than one specified as the Benchmark Component Futures Contract, or may hold Other Commodity-Related Investments that may fail to closely track the SDCI's total return movements. If USCI increases in size, and due to its obligations to comply with regulatory limits or due to other market pricing or liquidity factors, USCI may invest in Futures Contract months other than the designated month specified as the Benchmark Component Futures Contract, or in Other Commodity-Related Investments, which may have the effect of increasing transaction related expenses and may result in increased tracking error. USCI seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing in Futures Contracts and Other Commodity-Related Investments such that daily changes in its per share NAV closely track the daily changes in the price of the SDCI. USCI's positions in Commodity Interests are rebalanced on a monthly basis in order to track the changing nature of the SDCI. If Futures Contracts relating to a particular commodity remain in the SDCI from one month to the next, such Futures Contracts are rebalanced to the 7.14% target weight. Specifically, on a specified day near the end of each month (the "Selection Date"), it will be determined if a current Benchmark Component Futures Contract will be replaced by a new Futures Contract in either the same or different underlying commodity as a Benchmark Component Futures Contract for the following month, in which case USCI's investments would have to be changed accordingly. In order that USCI's trading does not unduly cause extraordinary market movements, and to make it more difficult for third parties to profit by trading based on market movements that could be expected from changes in the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts, USCI's investments typically are not rebalanced entirely on a single day, but rather typically rebalanced over a period of four days. After fulfilling the margin and collateral requirements with respect to its Commodity Interests, USCF invests the remainder of USCI's proceeds from the sale of shares in short-term obligations of the United States government ("Treasuries") or cash equivalents, and/or merely hold such assets in cash (generally in interest-bearing accounts).



United States Copper Index Fund

CPER invests in Futures Contracts for commodities that are traded on the COMEX and, to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, Other Copper-Related Investments (as defined below). Market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause CPER to invest in Other Copper-Related Investments would be those allowing CPER to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. The investment objective of CPER is for the daily changes in percentage terms of its shares' per share NAV to reflect the daily changes in percentage terms of the SummerHaven Copper Index Total ReturnSM (the "SCITR"), less CPER's expenses. USCF does not intend to operate CPER in a fashion such that its per share NAV will equal, in dollar terms, the spot prices of the commodities underlying the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts (as defined below) that comprise the SCITR or the prices of any particular group of Futures Contracts. The SCITR is designed to reflect the performance of the investment returns form a portfolio of copper futures contracts. The SCITR is owned and maintained by SummerHaven Indexing and calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. The SCITR is comprised of either two or three Eligible Copper Futures Contracts that are selected on a monthly basis based on quantitative formulas relating to the prices of the Eligible Copper Futures Contracts developed by SummerHaven Indexing. The Eligible Copper Futures Contracts that at any given time make up the SCITR are referred to herein as "Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts." 48

CPER seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing to the fullest extent possible in the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts. Then, if constrained by regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, CPER will invest next in other Eligible Copper Futures Contracts, and finally to a lesser extent, in other exchange traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts if one or more other Eligible Copper Futures Contracts is not available. When CPER has invested to the fullest extent possible in exchange-traded futures contracts, CPER may then invest in other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts, other Eligible Copper Futures Contracts or copper, such as cash-settled options, forward contracts, cleared swap contracts and swap contracts other than cleared swap contracts. Other exchange-traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts and other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts, are collectively referred to as "Other Copper-Related Investments," and together with Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts and other Eligible Copper Futures Contracts, "Copper Interests."



United States Agriculture Index Fund

USAG invests in Futures Contracts for commodities that are traded on the ICE Futures US, the ICE Futures Canada, the CBOT, the CME and the Kansas City Board of Trade ("KCBT") and, to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, Other Agriculture-Related Investments (as defined below). Market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause USAG to invest in Other Agriculture-Related Investments would be those allowing USAG to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. The investment objective of USAG is for the daily changes in percentage terms of its shares' per share NAV to reflect the daily changes in percentage terms of the SummerHaven Dynamic Agriculture Index Total ReturnSM (the "SDAI"), less USAG's expenses. USCF does not intend to operate USAG in a fashion such that its per share NAV will equal, in dollar terms, the spot prices of the commodities underlying the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts (as defined below) that comprise the SDAI or the prices of any particular group of Futures Contracts. The SDAI is owned and maintained by SummerHaven Indexing and calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. The SDAI is comprised of fourteen Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts that are selected on a monthly basis based on quantitative formulas developed by SummerHaven Indexing. The Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts that at any given time make up the SDAI are referred to herein as "Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts." USAG seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing to the fullest extent possible in the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts. Then, if constrained by regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, USAG will invest next in other Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts, and finally to a lesser extent, in other exchange traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts if one or more other Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts is not available. When USAG has invested to the fullest extent possible in exchange-traded futures contracts, USAG may then invest in other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts, other Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts or the agricultural commodities included in the SDAI, such as cash-settled options, forward contracts, cleared swap contracts and swap contracts other than cleared swap contracts. Other exchange-traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts and other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts, are collectively referred to as "Other Agriculture-Related Investments," and together with Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts and other Eligible Agriculture Futures Contracts, "Agriculture Interests."



United States Metals Index Fund

USMI invests in Futures Contracts for commodities that are traded on the NYMEX, the LME and the COMEX and, to a lesser extent, in order to comply with regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, Other Metals-Related Investments (as defined below). Market conditions that USCF currently anticipates could cause USMI to invest in Other Metals-Related Investments would be those allowing USMI to obtain greater liquidity or to execute transactions with more favorable pricing. 49 The investment objective of USMI is for the daily changes in percentage terms of its shares' per share NAV to reflect the daily changes in percentage terms of the SummerHaven Metals Index Total ReturnSM (the "SDMI"), less USMI's expenses. USCF does not intend to operate USMI in a fashion such that its per share NAV will equal, in dollar terms, the spot prices of the commodities underlying the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts (as defined below) that comprise the SDMI or the prices of any particular group of Futures Contracts. The SDMI is owned and maintained by SummerHaven Indexing and calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. The SDMI is comprised of ten Eligible Metals Futures Contracts that are selected on a monthly basis based on quantitative formulas developed by SummerHaven Indexing. The Eligible Metals Futures Contracts that at any given time make up the SDMI are referred to herein as "Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts." USMI seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing to the fullest extent possible in the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts. Then, if constrained by regulatory requirements or in view of market conditions, USMI will invest next in other Eligible Metals Futures Contracts, and finally to a lesser extent, in other exchange traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts if one or more other Eligible Metals Futures Contracts is not available. When USMI has invested to the fullest extent possible in exchange-traded futures contracts, USMI may then invest in other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts, other Eligible Metals Futures Contracts or the metals included in the SDMI, such as cash-settled options, forward contracts, cleared swap contracts and swap contracts other than cleared swap contracts. Other exchange-traded futures contracts that are economically identical or substantially similar to the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts and other contracts and instruments based on the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts are collectively referred to as "Other Metals-Related Investments," and together with Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts and other Eligible Metals Futures Contracts, "Metals Interests." Other Defined Terms



The SCITR, together with the SDCI, the SDAI and the SDMI are referred to throughout this quarterly report on Form 10-Q collectively as the "Applicable Index" or "Indices."

Benchmark Component Futures Contracts, Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts, Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts and Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts are referred to throughout this quarterly report on Form 10-Q collectively as "Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts."

Other Commodity-Related Investments, Other Copper-Related Investments, Other Agriculture-Related Investments and Other Metals-Related Investments are collectively referred to herein as "Other Related Investments." Commodity Interests, Copper Interests, Agriculture Interests and Metals Interests are collectively referred to herein as "Applicable Interests" throughout this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

Regulatory Disclosure Impact of Accountability Levels, Position Limits and Price Fluctuation Limits. Futures contracts include typical and significant characteristics. Most significantly, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the "CFTC") and the futures exchanges 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 is not applicable to the Trust Series' investments) may hold, own or control. The net position is the difference between an individual or firm's open long contracts and open short contracts in any one commodity. In addition, most U.S.-based futures exchanges limit the daily price fluctuation for futures contracts. Currently, the ICE Futures imposes position and accountability limits that are similar to those imposed by U.S.-based futures exchanges and also limits the maximum daily price fluctuation, while some other non-U.S. futures exchanges have not adopted such limits. 50 The accountability levels for the commodities comprising an Applicable Index and other futures contracts traded on U.S.-based futures exchanges are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which such exchanges may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor's positions. As of March 31, 2014, USCI held 1,870 Futures Contracts on the NYMEX, 3,231 Futures Contracts on ICE Futures, 1,573 Futures Contracts on CBOT, 2,007 Futures Contracts on CME, 7,336 Futures Contracts on LME and 547 Futures Contracts on COMEX. CPER held 40 Futures Contracts on COMEX. USAG held 29 Futures Contracts on ICE Futures, 11 Futures Contracts on CME, 1 Futures Contract on KCBT and 29 Futures Contracts on CBOT and USMI held 2 Futures Contracts on NYMEX, 40 Futures Contracts on LME and 11 Futures Contracts on COMEX. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, no Trust Series exceeded accountability levels imposed by the NYMEX, COMEX, CME, CBOT, KCBT or ICE Futures. 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 Futures Exchanges may impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that a Trust Series will run up against such position limits. A Trust Series does not typically hold the near month contract in its Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts. In addition, each Trust Series' investment strategy is to close out its positions during each Rebalancing Period in advance of the period right before expiration and purchase new contracts. As such, none of the Trust Series anticipates that position limits that apply to the last few days prior to a contract's expiration will impact it. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, no Trust Series exceeded position limits imposed by the NYMEX, COMEX, CME, CBOT, KCBT or ICE Futures. The regulation of commodity interest trading in the United States and other countries is an evolving area of the law, as exemplified by the various discussions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act"). The various statements made in this summary are subject to modification by legislative action and changes in the rules and regulations of the CFTC, the National Futures Association (the "NFA"), the futures exchanges, clearing organizations and other regulatory bodies.



Futures Contracts and Position Limits

The CFTC is prohibited by statute from regulating trading on non-U.S. futures exchanges and markets. The CFTC, however, has adopted regulations relating to the marketing of non-U.S. futures contracts in the United States. These regulations permit certain contracts on non-U.S. exchanges to be offered and sold in the United States. On November 5, 2013, the CFTC proposed a rulemaking that would establish specific limits on speculative positions in 28 physical commodity futures and option contracts as well as swaps that are economically equivalent to such contracts in the agriculture, energy and metals markets (the "Position Limit Rules"). On the same date, the CFTC proposed another rule addressing the circumstances under which market participants would be required to aggregate their positions with other persons under common ownership or control (the "Proposed Aggregation Requirements"). Specifically, the Position Limit Rules would, among other things: identify which contracts are subject to speculative position limits; set thresholds that restrict the number of speculative positions that a person may hold in a spot month, individual month, and all months combined; create an exemption for positions that constitute bona fide hedging transactions; impose responsibilities on designated contract markets ("DCMs") and swap execution facilities ("SEFs") to establish position limits or, in some cases, position accountability rules; and apply to both futures and swaps across four relevant venues: over-the-counter ("OTC"), DCMs, SEFs as well as non-U.S. located platforms. Until such time as the Position Limit Rules are adopted, the regulatory architecture in effect prior to the adoption of the Position Limit Rules will govern transactions in commodities and related derivatives (collectively, "Referenced Contracts"). Under that system, the CFTC enforces federal limits on speculation in agricultural products (e.g., corn, wheat and soy), while futures exchanges enforce position limits and accountability levels for agricultural and certain energy products (e.g., oil and natural gas). As a result, the Trust Series may be limited with respect to the size of its investments in any commodities subject to these limits. Finally, subject to certain narrow exceptions, the vacated Position Limit Rules require the aggregation, for purposes of the position limits, of all positions in the 28 Referenced Contracts held by a single entity and its affiliates, regardless of whether such position existed on U.S. futures exchanges, non-U.S. futures exchanges, in cleared swaps or in over-the-counter swaps. Under the CFTC's existing position limit requirements and the Position Limit Rules, a market participant is generally required to aggregate all positions for which that participant controls the trading decision with all positions for which that participant has a 10 percent or greater ownership interest in an account or position, as well as the positions of two or more persons acting pursuant to an express or implied agreement or understanding. At this time, it is unclear how the Proposed Aggregation Requirements may affect a Trust Series, but it may be substantial and adverse. By way of example, the Proposed Aggregation Requirements in combination with the Position Limit Rules may negatively impact the ability of a Trust Series to meet its investment objectives through limits that may inhibit USCF's ability to sell additional Creation Baskets of a Trust Series. 51



Based on its current understanding of the final position limit regulations, USCF does not anticipate significant negative impact on the ability of the Trust Series to achieve their investment objectives.

"Swap" Transactions The Dodd-Frank Act imposes regulatory requirements on certain "swap" transactions that a Trust Series is authorized to engage in that may ultimately impact the ability of a Trust Series to meet its investment objective. On August 13, 2012, the CFTC and the SEC published joint final rules defining the terms "swap" and "security-based swaps." The term "swap" is broadly defined to include various types of over-the-counter derivatives, including swaps and options. The effective date of these final rules was October 12, 2012. The Dodd-Frank Act requires that certain transactions ultimately falling within the definition of "swap" be executed on organized exchanges or "swap execution facilities" and cleared through regulated clearing organizations ("derivative clearing organizations" or "DCOs"), if the CFTC mandates the central clearing of a particular contract. On November 28, 2012, the CFTC issued its final clearing determination requiring that certain credit default swaps and interest rate swaps be cleared by registered DCOs. This is the CFTC's first clearing determination under the Dodd-Frank Act and became effective on February 11, 2013. Beginning on March 11, 2013, "swap dealers," "major swap participants" and certain active funds were required to clear certain credit default swaps and interest rate swaps; and beginning on June 10, 2013, commodity pools, certain private funds and entities predominantly engaged in financial activities were required to clear the same types of swaps. As a result, if a Trust Series enters into or has entered into certain interest rate and credit default swaps on or after June 10, 2013, such swaps will be required to be centrally cleared. Determination on other types of swaps are expected in the future, and, when finalized, could require each Trust Series to centrally clear certain over-the-counter instruments presently entered into and settled on a bi-lateral basis. If a swap is required to be cleared, the initial margin will be set by the clearing organizations, subject to certain regulatory requirements and guidelines. Initial and variation margin requirements for swap dealers and major swap participants who enter into uncleared swaps and capital requirements for swap dealers and major swap participants who enter into both cleared and uncleared trades will be set by the CFTC, the SEC or the applicable "Prudential Regulator." The Dodd-Frank Act also requires that certain swaps determined to be available to trade on a SEF must be executed over such a facility. On June 5, 2013, the CFTC published a final rule regarding the obligations of SEFs, including the obligation for facilities offering multiple person execution services to register as a SEF by October 2, 2013. Based upon applications filed by several SEFs with the CFTC, the CFTC has determined that certain interest rate swaps and credit default index swaps are available to trade on SEFs and beginning on February 15, 2014, certain interest rate swaps and credit default index swaps must be executed on a SEF.



On November 14, 2013, the CFTC's Division of Clearing and Risk, Division of Market Oversight and Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight published guidance with respect to the application of certain CFTC rules on SEFs. That guidance clarified that SEFs could not restrict access to participants who are permitted to trade swaps and that SEFs may not require participants to have breakage agreements in place with other counterparties.

On April 11, 2013, the CFTC published a final rule to exempt swaps between certain affiliated entities within a corporate group from the clearing requirement. The rule permits affiliated counterparties to elect not to clear a swap subject to the clearing requirement if, among other things, the counterparties are majority-owned affiliates whose financial statements are included in the same consolidated financial statements and whose swaps are documented and subject to a centralized risk management program. However, the exemption does not apply to swaps entered into by affiliated counterparties

with unaffiliated counterparties. On November 14, 2013, the CFTC published final regulations that require enhanced customer protections, risk management programs, internal monitoring and controls, capital and liquidity standards, customer disclosures and auditing and examination programs for FCMs. The rules are intended to afford greater assurances to market participants that customer segregated funds and secured amounts are protected, customers are provided with appropriate notice of the risks of futures trading and of the FCMs with which they may choose to do business, FCMs are monitoring and managing risks in a robust manner, the capital and liquidity of FCMs are strengthened to safeguard the continued operations and the auditing and examination programs of the CFTC and the self-regulatory organizations are monitoring the activities of FCMs in a thorough manner. 52



On April 5, 2013, the CFTC's Division of Clearing and Risk issued a letter granting no-action relief from certain swap data reporting requirements for swaps entered into between affiliated counterparties. In general, the letter grants relief from, among others: real-time, historical and regular swap reporting (under Part 43, Part 45 and Part 46 of the CFTC's regulations, respectively).

On November 6, 2013, the CFTC published a final rule that imposes requirements on swap dealers and major swap participants with respect to the treatment of collateral posted by their counterparties to margin, guarantee, or secure uncleared swaps. In other words, the rule places restrictions on what swap dealers and major swap participants can do with collateral posted by each Trust Series in connection with uncleared swaps. In addition to the rules and regulations imposed under the Dodd-Frank Act, swap dealers that are European banks may also be subject to European Market Infrastructure Regulation ("EMIR"). These regulations have not yet been fully implemented.



General Regulation Applicable to each Trust Series

On August 12, 2013, the CFTC issued final rules establishing compliance obligations for commodity pool operators ("CPOs") of investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "Investment Company Act") that are required to register due to recent changes to CFTC Regulation 4.5. The final rules were issued in a CFTC release entitled "Harmonization of Compliance Obligations for Registered Investment Companies Required to Register as Commodity Pool Operators." For entities that are registered with both the CFTC and the SEC, the CFTC will accept the SEC's disclosure, reporting and recordkeeping regime as substituted compliance for substantially all of Part 4 of the CFTC's regulations, so long as they comply with comparable requirements under the SEC's statutory and regulatory compliance regime. Thus, the final rules (the "Harmonization Rules") allow dually registered entities to meet certain CFTC regulatory requirements for CPOs by complying with SEC rules to which they are already subject. Although none of the Trust Series is a registered investment company under the Investment Company Act, the Harmonization Rules amended certain CFTC disclosure rules to make the requirements for all CPOs to periodically update their disclosure documents consistent with those of the SEC. This change will decrease the burden to the Trust Series and USCF of having to comply with inconsistent regulatory requirements. It is not known whether the CFTC will make additional amendments to its disclosure, reporting and recordkeeping rules to further harmonize these obligations with those of the SEC as they apply to the Trust Series and USCF, but any such further rule changes could result in additional operating efficiencies for the Trust Series and USCF.



As the regulatory requirements are constantly evolving, it is difficult to predict the effect any regulatory changes may have on the Trust Series.

Commodity Markets



Commodity Futures Price Movements

Three Months Ended March 31, 2014

As measured by the four major diversified commodity indexes listed below, commodity futures prices exhibited an upward trend during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The table below compares the total returns of the SDCI to the three major diversified commodity indexes over this time period. SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity Index Total ReturnSM(1) 4.78 % S&P GSCI Commodity Index (GSCI®) Total Return(2) 2.94 % Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index Total ReturnSM(2)



6.99 % Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Total ReturnTM(2) 3.76 %

(1) The inception date for the SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity Index Total ReturnSM is December 2009. (2) Source: Bloomberg 53



The value of the SDCI as of December 31, 2013 was 1,678.73. As of March 31, 2014, the value of the SDCI was 1,758.97, up approximately 4.78% over the three months ended March 31, 2014.

The return of approximately 4.78% on the SDCI listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Futures Contracts due to the impact of trading costs and other expenses. USCI's per share NAV began the year at $56.06 and ended the period at $58.60 on March 31, 2014, an increase of approximately 4.53% over the period. USCI's per share NAV reached its high for the period on March 6, 2014, 2014 at $58.89 and reached its low for the period on January 9, 2014 at $54.77. See "Tracking the SDCI" below for information about how expenses and income affect USCI's per share NAV.

Copper Markets



Copper Futures Price Movements

Three Months Ended March 31, 2014

As measured by the two major copper indexes, copper futures prices exhibited daily swings with a downward trend during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The table below compares the total returns of the SCITR to the Dow Jones-UBS Copper Subindex Total Return over this time period.

SummerHaven Copper Index Total ReturnTM(1) (10.63 )% Dow Jones-UBS Copper Subindex Total Return(2) (10.83 )%

(1) The inception date for the SummerHaven Copper Index Total ReturnTM is November 2010. (2) Source: Bloomberg



The value of the SCITR as of December 31, 2013 was 1,114.30. As of March 31, 2014, the value of the SCITR was 995.85, down approximately 10.63% over the three months ended March 31, 2014.

The return of approximately (10.63)% on the SCITR listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Futures Contracts due to the impact of trading costs and other expenses. CPER's per share NAV began the year at $22.92 and ended the period at $20.43 on March 31, 2014, a decrease of approximately 10.86% over the period. CPER's per share NAV reached its high for the period on January 2, 2014 at $22.82 and reached its low for the period on March 13, 2014 at $19.75. See "Tracking the SCITR" for information about how expenses and income affect CPER's per share NAV. Agriculture Markets



Agriculture Futures Price Movements

Three Months Ended March 31, 2014

As measured by the four major agriculture indexes listed below, agriculture futures prices exhibited moderate daily swings along with an upward trend during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The table below compares the total returns of the SDAI to the three major agriculture indexes over this time period.

SummerHaven Dynamic Agriculture Index Total ReturnSM(1) 15.65 % S&P GSCI® Agriculture Index Total Return(2) 15.92 % Dow Jones-UBS Agriculture Total Return Sub-indexSM(2) 16.51 % Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Agriculture ReturnTM(2)

9.56 %

(1) The inception date for the SummerHaven Dynamic Agriculture Index Total ReturnSM is September 2010. (2) Source: Bloomberg 54 The value of the SDAI as of December 31, 2013 was 324.11. As of March 31, 2014, the value of the SDAI was 374.83, up approximately 15.65% over the three months ended March 31, 2014. The return of approximately 15.65% on the SDAI listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Futures Contracts due to the impact of trading costs and other expenses. USAG's per share NAV began the year at $22.79 and ended the period at $26.23 on March 31, 2014, an increase of approximately 15.09% over the period. USAG's per share NAV reached its high for the period on March 19, 2014 at $26.39 and reached its low for the period on January 9, 2014 at $22.56. See "Tracking the SDAI" below for information about how expenses and income affect USAG's per share NAV. Metals Markets



Metals Futures Price Movements

Three Months Ended March 31, 2014

As measured by the four major metals indexes listed below, metals futures prices exhibited moderate daily swings along with a downward trend during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The table below compares the total returns of the SDMI to the three major metals indexes over this time period. SummerHaven Metals Index Total ReturnSM(1) 0.00 % Rogers International Commodity Index®-Metals Total Return(2) (1.31 )% Dow Jones-UBS Industrial Metals Total Return Sub-indexSM(2) (4.55 )%



Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Industrials Metals Total ReturnTM(2) (5.10 )%

(1) The inception date for the SummerHaven Metals Index Total ReturnSM is

September 2010. (2) Source: Bloomberg The value of the SDMI as December 31, 2013 was 727.17. As of March 31, 2014, the value of the SDMI was 727.18, which was essentially unchanged over the three months ended March 31, 2014. The return of approximately 0.00% on the SDMI listed above is a hypothetical return only and could not actually be achieved by an investor holding Futures Contracts due to the impact of trading costs and other expenses. USMI's per share NAV began the year at $21.97 and ended the period at $21.83 on March 31, 2014, a decrease of approximately 0.64% over the period. USMI's per share NAV reached its high for the period on March 6, 2014 at $22.81 and reached its low for the period on February 4, 2014 at $21.42. See "Tracking the SDMI" below for information about how expenses and income affect USMI's per share NAV.



Valuation of Futures Contracts and the Computation of the Per Share NAV

Each Trust Series' NAV is calculated once each NYSE Arca trading day. The per share NAV for a particular trading day is released after 4:00 p.m.New York time. Trading during the core trading session on the NYSE Arca typically closes at 4:00 p.m.New York time. The Trust Series' Administrator uses the closing prices on the relevant Futures Exchanges of the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts (determined at the earlier of the close of such exchange or 2:30 p.m.New York time) for the contracts held on the Futures Exchanges, but calculates or determines the value of all other investments of such Trust Series using market quotations, if available, or other information customarily used to determine the fair value of such investments. 55 Results of Operations

On July 30, 2010, USCI received a notice of effectiveness from the SEC for its registration of 50,000,000 shares on Form S-1 with the SEC. On August 10, 2010, USCI listed its shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbol "USCI." USCI established its initial offering per share NAV by setting the price at $50.00 and issued 100,000 shares to the initial authorized purchaser in exchange for $5,000,000 in cash on August 10, 2010. USCI commenced investment operations on August 10, 2010 by purchasing Futures Contracts traded on the Futures Exchanges. In order to satisfy NYSE Arca listing standards that at least 100,000 shares be outstanding at the beginning of the trading day on the NYSE Arca, USCF purchased the initial Creation Basket from the initial Authorized Purchaser at the initial offering price. The $1,000 fee that would otherwise be charged to the Authorized Purchaser in connection with an order to create or redeem was waived in connection with the initial Creation Basket. USCF agreed not to resell the shares comprising such basket except that it may require the initial Authorized Purchaser to repurchase all of these shares at a per share price equal to USCI's per share NAV within five days following written notice from USCF, subject to the conditions that: (i) on the date of repurchase, the initial Authorized Purchaser must immediately redeem these shares in accordance with the terms of the Authorized Purchaser Agreement and (ii) immediately following such redemption at least 100,000 shares of USCI remain outstanding. USCF held such initial Creation Basket until September 3, 2010, at which time the initial Authorized Purchaser repurchased the shares comprising such basket in accordance with the specified conditions noted above. On September 14, 2011, USCF redeemed the 20 Sponsor Shares of USCI, and on September 19, 2011, USCF purchased 5 shares of USCI in the open market. Since its initial offering of 50,000,000 shares, USCI has not registered any subsequent offerings of its shares. As of March 31, 2014, USCI had issued 14,350,000 shares, 9,750,000 of which were outstanding. As of March 31, 2014, there were 35,650,000 shares registered but not yet issued. More shares may have been issued by USCI than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares. In connection with the Second Amended and Restated Trust Agreement dated November 10, 2010, USMI, USAG and CPER were designated as three additional series of the Trust. Following the designation of the additional series, an initial capital contribution of $3,000 was transferred from USCF to the Trust. On November 10, 2010, the Trust transferred $1,000 to each of USMI, USAG and CPER, which was deemed a capital contribution to each series. On November 14, 2011, USCF received 40 Sponsor Shares of CPER in exchange for the previously received capital contribution, representing a beneficial interest in CPER. On December 7, 2011, USCF redeemed the 40 Sponsor Shares of CPER and purchased 40 shares of CPER in the open market. On April 13, 2012, USCF received 40 Sponsor Shares of USAG in exchange for the previously received capital contribution, representing a beneficial interest in USAG. On June 28, 2012, USCF redeemed the 40 Sponsor shares of USAG and on October 3, 2012, purchased 5 shares of USAG on the open market. On June 19, 2012, USCF received 40 Sponsor Shares of USMI in exchange for the previously received capital contribution, representing a beneficial interest in USMI. On August 27, 2012, USCF redeemed the 40 Sponsor shares of USMI and, on September 4, 2013, USCF purchased 5 shares of USMI on the open market. CPER, USAG and USMI received notice of effectiveness from the SEC for its registration of 30,000,000 CPER shares, 20,000,000 USAG shares and 20,000,000 USMI shares on September 6, 2011. The order to permit listing CPER, USMI and USAG on the NYSE Arca was received on October 20, 2011. On November 15, 2011, CPER listed its shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbol "CPER." CPER established its initial offering per share NAV by setting the price at $25.00 and issued 100,000 shares to the initial authorized purchaser in exchange for $2,500,000 in cash on November 15, 2011. The $1,000 fee that would otherwise have been charged to the Authorized Purchaser in connection with an order to create or redeem was waived in connection with the initial Creation Basket. Since its initial offering of 30,000,000 shares, CPER has not registered any subsequent offerings of its shares. As of March 31, 2014, CPER had issued 200,000 shares, 150,000 of which were outstanding. As of March 31, 2014, there were 29,800,000 shares registered but not yet issued. More shares may have been issued by CPER than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares. 56

On April 13, 2012, USAG listed its shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbol "USAG." USAG established its initial per share NAV by setting the price at $25.00. On April 14, 2012, USCF purchased two initial Creation Baskets of USAG. In accordance with applicable requirements of Regulation M under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, no Creation Baskets were offered to Authorized Purchasers nor were the shares listed on the NYSE Arca until five business days had elapsed from the date of USCF's purchase of the initial Creation Basket on April 4, 2012. The fee that would have otherwise been charged in connection with an order to create or redeem was waived in connection with the initial Creation Basket. Since its initial offering of 20,000,000 shares, USAG has not registered any subsequent offerings of its shares. As of March 31, 2014, USAG had issued 200,000 shares, 100,000 of which were outstanding. As of March 31, 2014, there were 19,800,000 shares registered but not yet issued. More shares may have been issued by USAG than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares. On June 19, 2012, USMI listed its shares on the NYSE Arca under the ticker symbol "USMI." USMI established its initial per share NAV by setting the price at $25.00. On June 11, 2012, USCF purchased two initial Creation Baskets of USMI. In accordance with applicable requirements of Regulation M under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, no Creation Baskets were offered to Authorized Purchasers nor were the shares listed on the NYSE Arca until five business days had elapsed from the date of USCF's purchase of the initial Creation Basket on June 11, 2012. The fee that would have otherwise been charged in connection with an order to create or redeem was waived in connection with the initial Creation Basket. On September 4, 2013, USCF redeemed the second of two initial Creation Baskets of USMI. Since its initial offering of 20,000,000 shares, USMI has not registered any subsequent offerings of its shares. As of March 31, 2014, USMI had issued 200,000 shares, 100,000 of which were outstanding. As of March 31, 2014, there were 19,800,000 shares registered but not yet issued. More shares may have been issued by USMI than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares. Unlike funds that are registered under the 1940 Act, shares that have been redeemed by the Trust Series cannot be resold. As a result, each Trust Series contemplates that additional offerings of its shares will be registered with the SEC in the future in anticipation of additional issuances and redemptions.



As of March 31, 2014, USCI had the following authorized purchasers: Citadel Securities LLC, Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Jefferies & Company Inc., JP Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan Stanley & Company Inc., Newedge USA LLC and Virtu Financial BD LLC.

As of March 31, 2014, CPER, USAG and USMI had the following authorized purchasers: Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Jefferies & Company Inc., JP Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Newedge USALLC and Virtu Financial BD LLC. 57 For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2014 Compared to the Three Months Ended March 31, 2013USCI For the three months ended For the three months ended March 31, 2014March 31, 2013

Per share net asset value, end of period $ 58.60 $ 57.00 Average daily total net assets $ 537,902,813 $ 511,484,072 Cash deposits and investments in Treasuries $ 562,668,687 $ 528,220,328 Interest income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents $ 70,654 $ 81,796



Percentage of cash assets held as overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries at custodian

92.34 % 86.95 % Percentage of cash assets held as investments in Treasuries and margin deposits for Futures Contracts 7.66 % 13.05 % Annualized yield based on average daily total net assets 0.05 % 0.06 % Total unrealized gain (loss) on Futures Contracts $ 9,307,123 $ (20,330,147 ) Management fee $ 1,260,019 $ 1,198,134 Total fees and other expenses excluding management fees $ 260,303 $ 191,353



Directors' fees and expenses for Related Public Funds for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13

$ 560,625 $ 555,465 USCI's portion of the directors' fees and expenses $ 109,683 $ 104,184 Fees and expenses related to the registration or offering of additional shares $ - $ -



Estimated audit, tax accounting and reporting fees and expenses for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13 $

350,000 $ 400,000 Total commissions accrued to brokers $ 101,246 $ 92,612 Total commissions as annualized percentage of average total net assets 0.08 % 0.07 % Commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing $ 98,726 $ 90,204 Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing 97.51 % 97.40 % Commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity $ 2,520 $ 2,408 Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity

2.49 % 2.60 % The increase in the per share NAV for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was primarily due to the increase in the values of the Futures Contracts held by USCI. The increase in cash assets in overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31 2013, was the result of USCI's greater size during the three months ended March 31, 2014 as measured by total net assets. Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by USCI, including cash equivalents and Treasuries, were similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013. As a result, the amount of income earned by USCI as a percentage of average total net assets was similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013. The increase in total fees and expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was due to an increase in certain of USCI's operating expenses during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The increase in the total commissions accrued to brokers by USCI for the three months ended March 31, 2014 as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was primarily due to an increase in the number of contracts traded during the rebalancing periods for the three months ended March 31, 2014. 58 CPER For the three months ended For the three months ended March 31, 2014March 31, 2013

Per share net asset value, end of period $ 20.43 $ 23.69 Average daily total net assets $ 2,303,589 $ 2,519,243 Cash deposits and investments in Treasuries $ 3,162,361 $ 2,565,844 Interest income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents $ 306 $ 451



Percentage of cash assets held as overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries at custodian

87.66 % 80.72 % Percentage of cash assets held as investments in Treasuries and margin deposits for the Futures Contracts 12.34 % 19.28 % Annualized yield based on average daily total net Assets 0.05 % 0.07 % Total unrealized loss on Futures Contracts $ (95,737 ) $ (195,163 ) Management fee $ 3,692 $ 4,038 Total fees and other expenses excluding management fees $ 15,624 $ 24,982



Directors' fees and expenses for Related Public Funds for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13

$ 560,625 $ 555,465 CPER's portion of the directors' fees and expenses $ 494 $ 488 Fees and expenses related to the registration or offering of additional shares $ - $ - Total amount of the expense waiver $ 14,268 $ 23,895 Expenses before allowance for the expense waiver $ 19,316 $ 29,020 Expenses after allowance for the expense waiver $ 5,048 $ 5,125



Estimated audit, tax accounting and reporting fees and expenses for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13 $

55,000 $ 60,000 Total commissions accrued to brokers $ 368 $ 46 Total commissions as annualized percentage of average total net assets 0.06 % 0.00 % Commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing $ 292 $ 46 Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing 79.38 % 100 % Commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity $ 76 $ - Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity

20.62 % - % The decrease in the per share NAV for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to the decrease in the values of the Futures Contracts that CPER held. The increase in cash assets in overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was the result of CPER's larger size as of March 31, 2014 as measured

by total net assets. Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by CPER, including cash equivalents and Treasuries, were similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013. As a result, the amount of income earned by CPER as a percentage of average total net assets was similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013.

The decrease in gross total fees and expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was primarily due to a decrease in certain of CPER's operating expenses during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The increase in CPER's total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended March 31, 2014 as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to an increase in the number of contracts traded during the rebalancing periods for three months ended March 31, 2014. 59 USAG For the three months ended For the three months ended March 31, 2014March 31, 2013

Per share net asset value, end of period $ 26.23 $ 24.01 Average daily total net assets $ 2,423,654 $ 2,486,063 Cash deposits and investments in Treasuries $ 2,480,075 $ 2,510,572 Interest income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents $ 308 $ 467



Percentage of cash assets held as overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries at custodian

91.62 % 80.35 % Percentage of cash assets held as investments in Treasuries and margin deposits for the Futures Contracts 8.38 % 19.65 % Annualized yield based on average daily total net Assets 0.05 % 0.08 % Total unrealized gain (loss) on Futures Contracts $ 145,490 $ (107,311 ) Management fee $ 4,781 $ 4,904 Total fees and other expenses excluding management fees $ 5,942 $ 31,433



Directors' fees and expenses for Related Public Funds for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13

$ 560,625 $ 555,465 USAG's portion of the directors' fees and expenses $ 542 $ 471 Fees and expenses related to the registration or offering of additional shares $ - $ - Total amount of the expense waiver $ 4,511 $ 29,683 Expenses before allowance for the expense waiver $ 10,723 $ 36,337 Expenses after allowance for the expense waiver $ 6,212 $ 6,474



Estimated audit, tax accounting and reporting fees and expenses for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13 $

55,000 $ 60,000 Total commissions accrued to brokers $ 401 $ 571 Total commissions as annualized percentage of average total net assets 0.07 % 0.10 % Commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing $ 401 $ 571 Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing 100 % 100 % Commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity $ - $ - Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity

- % - % The increase in the per share NAV for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to the increase in the values of the Futures Contracts that USAG held. The decrease in cash assets in overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was the result of USAG's smaller average size as of March 31, 2014 as measured by average total net assets. Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by USAG, including cash equivalents and Treasuries, were similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013. As a result, the amount of income earned by USAG as a percentage of average total net assets was similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013.

The decrease in gross total fees and expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was primarily due to a decrease in USAG's other operating expenses during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The decrease in USAG's total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended March 31, 2014 as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to a decrease in the number of futures contracts traded during the three months ended March 31, 2014. 60 USMI For the three months ended For the three months ended March 31, 2014March 31, 2013

Per share net asset value, end of period $ 21.83 $ 25.17 Average daily total net assets $ 2,209,025 $ 2,643,731 Cash deposits and investments in Treasuries $ 2,209,215 $ 2,578,489 Interest income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents $ 256 $ 446



Percentage of cash assets held as overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries at custodian

85.76 % 82.61 % Percentage of cash assets held as investments in Treasuries and margin deposits for the Futures Contracts 14.24 % 17.39 % Annualized yield based on average daily total net Assets 0.05 % 0.07 % Total unrealized loss on Futures Contracts $ (23,776 ) $ (58,802 ) Management fee $ 3,813 $ 4,563 Total fees and other expenses excluding management fees $ 5,730 $ 31,113



Directors' fees and expenses for Related Public Funds for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13

$ 560,625 $ 555,465 USMI's portion of the directors' fees and expenses $ 514 $ 493 Fees and expenses related to the registration or offering of additional shares $ - $ - Total amount of the expense waiver $ 4,583 $ 29,804 Expenses before allowance for the expense waiver $ 9,543 $ 35,676 Expenses after allowance for the expense waiver $ 4,960 $ 5,872



Estimated audit, tax accounting and reporting fees and expenses for the years ended 12/31/14 and 12/31/13 $

55,000 $ 60,000 Total commissions accrued to brokers $ 194 $ 246 Total commissions as annualized percentage of average total net assets 0.04 % 0.04 % Commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing $ 194 $ 246 Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of rebalancing 100 % 100 % Commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity $ - $ - Percentage of commissions accrued as a result of creation and redemption activity

- % - % The decrease in the per share NAV for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to the decrease in the values of the Futures Contracts that USMI held. The decrease in cash assets in overnight deposits and investments in Treasuries for the three months ended March 31, 2014, as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was the result of USMI's smaller size as of March 31, 2014 as measured by total net assets. Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by USMI, including cash equivalents and Treasuries, were similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013. As a result, the amount of income earned by USMI as a percentage of average total net assets was similar during the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013.

The decrease in gross total fees and expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2014 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013 was primarily due to a decrease in USMI's other operating expenses during the three months ended March 31, 2014. The decrease in USMI's total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended March 31, 2014 as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2013, was primarily due to a decrease in the total number of futures contracts traded during the three months ended March 31,

2014. 61



Tracking Each Trust Series' Benchmark

USCF seeks to manage each Trust Series' portfolio such that changes in its average daily per share NAV, on a percentage basis, closely track the daily changes in the price of the Applicable Index, 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 a Trust Series' per share NAV is within a range of 90% to 110% (0.9 to 1.1) of the average daily change in the price of the Applicable Index. As an example, if the average daily movement of the price of the Applicable Index 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 Applicable Index's results). Each Trust Series' portfolio management goals do not include trying to make the nominal price of its per share NAV equal to the nominal price of the Applicable Index, the nominal price of any particular commodity Futures Contract or the spot price for any particular commodity. USCF believes that it is not practical to manage the portfolio to achieve such an investment goal when investing in listed Futures Contracts. USCI For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDCI was 0.073%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USCI over the same time period was 0.072%. The average daily difference was (0.001)% (or (0.1) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDCI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was 0.16%, meaning that over this time period USCI's tracking error was within the plus or minus 10% range established as

its benchmark tracking goal. Since the commencement of the offering of USCI's shares to the public on August 10, 2010 to March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDCI was 0.026%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USCI over the same time period was 0.021%. The average daily difference was (0.005)% (or (0.5) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDCI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (11.73)%, meaning that over this time period USCI's tracking error was not within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. The following two graphs demonstrate the correlation between the changes in USCI's NAV and the changes in the SDCI. The first graph exhibits the daily changes for the last 30 valuation days ended March 31, 2014; the second graph measures the monthly changes from March 31, 2011 through March 31, 2014. [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 62 [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of USCI versus the return of the SDCI can be calculated by comparing the actual return of USCI, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that USCI's returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in the price of the SDCI. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, the actual total return of USCI as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 4.53%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $56.06 as of December 31, 2013 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2014 of $58.60. During this time period, USCI made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USCI's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDCI, USCI would have had an estimated per share NAV of $58.74 as of March 31, 2014, for a total return over the relevant time period of 4.78%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USCI of 4.53% and the expected total return based on the SDCI of 4.78% was an error over the time period of (0.25)%, which is to say that USCI's actual total return underperformed the SDCI result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SDCI total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that USCI pays, offset in part by the income that USCI collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USCI earned interest income of $70,654, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.05% for such period. In addition, during the three months ended March 31, 2014, USCI also collected $3,150 from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. This income also contributed to USCI's actual total return. However, if the total assets of USCI continue to increase, USCF believes that the impact on actual total returns of these fees from creations and redemptions will diminish as a percentage of the actual total return. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USCI incurred total expenses of $1,520,322. Income from interest and Authorized Purchaser collections net of expenses was $(1,446,518), which is equivalent to an annualized weighted average net income rate of approximately (1.09)% for the three months ended March 31, 2014. 63

By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2013, the actual total return of USCI as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (2.48)%. This was based on an initial per share NAV of $58.45 as of December 31, 2012 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2013 of $57.00. During this time period, USCI made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USCI's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDCI, USCI would have had an estimated per share NAV of $57.24 as of March 31, 2013, for a total return over the relevant time period of (2.07)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USCI of (2.48)% and the expected total return based on the SDCI of (2.07)% was an error over the time period of (0.41)%, which is to say that USCI's actual total return underperformed the SDCI result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SDCI total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that USCI paid, offset in part by the income that USCI collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USCI earned interest income of $81,796, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.06% for such period. In addition, during the three months ended March 31, 2013, USCI also collected $4,900 from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. This income also contributed to USCI's actual total return. However, if the total assets of USCI continue to increase, USCF believes that the impact on actual total returns of these fees from creations and redemptions will diminish as a percentage of the actual total return. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USCI incurred total expenses of $1,389,487. Income from interest and Authorized Purchaser collections net of expenses was $(1,302,791), which is equivalent to an annualized weighted average net income rate of approximately (1.03)% for the three months ended March 31, 2013. CPER For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SCITR was (0.233)%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of CPER over the same time period was (0.237)%. The average daily difference was (0.004)% (or (0.4) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SCITR, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (2.52)%, meaning that over this time period CPER's tracking error was within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. Since the commencement of the offering of CPER's shares to the public on November 15, 2011 to March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SCITR was (0.021)%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of CPER over the same time period was (0.026)%. The average daily difference was (0.005)% (or (0.5) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SCITR, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (5.32)%, meaning that over this time period CPER's tracking error was within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. The following two graphs demonstrate the correlation between the changes in CPER's NAV and the changes in the SCITR. The first graph exhibits the daily changes for the last 30 valuation days ended March 31, 2014; the second graph measures the monthly changes from March 31, 2012 through March 31, 2014. [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 64 [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of CPER versus the return of the SCITR can be calculated by comparing the actual return of CPER, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that CPER's returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in the price of the SCITR. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, the actual total return of CPER as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (10.86)%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $22.92 as of December 31, 2013 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2014 of $20.43. During this time period, CPER made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if CPER's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SCITR, CPER would have had an estimated per share NAV of $20.48 as of March 31, 2014, for a total return over the relevant time period of (10.65)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of CPER of (10.86)% and the expected total return based on the SCITR of (10.65)% was an error over the time period of (0.21)%, which is to say that CPER's actual total return underperformed the SCITR result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SCITR total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that CPER pays, offset in part by the income that CPER collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, CPER earned interest income of $306, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.05% for such period. In addition, during the three months ended March 31, 2014, CPER also collected $350 from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. This income also contributed to CPER's actual total return. However, if the total assets of CPER continue to increase, USCF believes that the impact on actual total returns of these fees from creations and redemptions will diminish as a percentage of the actual total return. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, CPER incurred net expenses of $5,048. Income from interest net of expenses was $(4,392), which is equivalent to a weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.77)% for the three months ended March 31, 2014. By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2013, the actual total return of CPER as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (6.84)%. This was based on an initial per share NAV as of $25.43 as of December 31, 2012 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2013 of $23.69. During this time period, CPER made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if CPER's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SCITR, CPER would have had an estimated per share NAV of $23.78 as of March 31, 2013, for a total return over the relevant time period of (6.49)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of CPER of (6.84)% and the expected total return based on the SCITR of (6.49)% was an error over the time period of (0.35)%, which is to say that CPER's actual total return underperformed the SCITR result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SCITR total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that CPER paid, offset in part by the income that CPER collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, CPER earned interest income of $451, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.07% for such period. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, CPER did not collect any fees from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, CPER incurred net expenses of $5,125. Income from interest and Authorized Purchaser collections net of expenses was $(4,674), which is equivalent to a weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.75)% for the three months ended March 31, 2013. 65 USAG For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDAI was 0.336%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USAG over the same time period was 0.328%. The average daily difference was (0.08)% (or (0.8) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDAI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (1.74)%, meaning that over this time period USAG's tracking error was within the plus or minus 10% range established as

its benchmark tracking goal. Since the commencement of the offering of USAG's shares to the public on April 13, 2012 to March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDAI was 0.017%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USAG over the same time period was 0.012%. The average daily difference was (0.005)% (or (0.5) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDAI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (2.70)%, meaning that over this time period USAG's tracking error was wihin the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. The following two graphs demonstrate the correlation between the changes in USAG's NAV and the changes in the SDAI. The first graph exhibits the daily changes for the last 30 valuation days ended March 31, 2014; the second graph measures the monthly changes from March 31, 2013 through March 31, 2014. [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 66 [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of USAG versus the return of the SDAI can be calculated by comparing the actual return of USAG, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that USAG's returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in the price of the SDAI. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, the actual total return of USAG as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 15.09%.This is based on an initial per share NAV of $22.79 as of December 31, 2013 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2014 of $26.23. During this time period, USAG made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USAG's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDAI, USAG would have had an estimated per share NAV of $26.36 as of March 31, 2014, for a total return over the relevant time period of 15.66%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USAG of 15.09% and the expected total return based on the SDAI of 15.66% was an error over the time period of (0.57)%, which is to say that USAG's actual total return underperformed the SDAI result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SDAI total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that USAG pays, offset in part by the income that USAG collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USAG earned interest income of $308, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.05% for such period. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USAG did not collect any fees from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USAG incurred net expenses of $6,212. Income from interest net of expenses was $(5,904), which is equivalent to a weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.99)% for the three months ended March 31, 2014. By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2013, the actual total return of USAG as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (6.06)%.This was based on an initial per share NAV of $25.56 as of December 31, 2012 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2013 of $24.01. During this time period, USAG made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USAG's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDAI, USAG would have had an estimated per share NAV of $24.06 as of March 31, 2013, for a total return over the relevant time period of (5.87)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USAG of (6.06)% and the expected total return based on the SDAI of (5.87)% was an error over the time period of (0.19)%, which is to say that USAG's actual total return underperformed the SDAI result by that percentage. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SDAI total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that USAG paid, offset in part by the income that USAG collected on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USAG earned interest income of $467, which was equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.08% for such period. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USAG did not collect any fees from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USAG incurred net expenses of $6,474. Income from interest net of expenses was $(6,007), which was equivalent to a weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.98)% for the three months ended March 31, 2013. 67 USMI For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDMI was (0.066)%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USMI over the same time period was (0.083)%. The average daily difference was (0.17)% (or (1.72) basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDMI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (40.24)%, meaning that over this time period USMI's tracking error was not within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. Since the commencement of the offering of USMI's shares to the public on June 19, 2012 to March 31, 2014, the simple average daily change in the SDMI was (0.020)%, while the simple average daily change in the per share NAV of USMI over the same time period was (0.025)%. The average daily difference was 0.005% (or 0.5 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%). As a percentage of the daily movement of the SDMI, the average error in daily tracking by the per share NAV was (2.66)%, meaning that over this time period USMI's tracking error was within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal. The following two graphs demonstrate the correlation between the changes in USMI's NAV and the changes in the SDMI. The first graph exhibits the daily changes for the last 30 valuation days ended March 31, 2014; the second graph measures the monthly changes from March 31, 2013 through March 31, 2014. [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 68 [[Image Removed]] *PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of USMI versus the return of the SDMI can be calculated by comparing the actual return of USMI, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that USMI's returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in the price of the SDMI. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, the actual total return of USMI as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (0.64)%. This is based on an initial per share NAV of $21.97 as of December 31, 2013 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2014 of $21.83. During this time period, USMI made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USMI's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDMI, USMI would have had an estimated per share NAV of $21.97 as of March 31, 2014, for a total return over the relevant time period of 0.00%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USMI of (0.64)% and the expected total return based on the SDMI of 0.00% was an error over the time period of (0.64)%, which is to say that USMI's actual total return underperformed the SDMI over the time period. USCF believes that a portion of the difference between the actual total return and the expected SDMI total return can be attributed to the net impact of the expenses that USMI pays, offset in part by the income that USMI collects on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USMI earned interest income of $256, which is equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.05% for such period. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USMI did not collect any fees from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USMI incurred net expenses of $4,960. Income from interest and Authorized Purchaser collections net of expenses was $(4,704), which is equivalent to an annualized weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.86)% for the three months ended March 31, 2014. By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2013, the actual total return of USMI as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (4.91)%. This was based on an initial per share NAV of $26.47 as of December 31, 2012 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2013 of $25.17. During this time period, USMI made no distributions to its shareholders. However, if USMI's daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the SDMI, USMI would have had an estimated per share NAV of $25.17 as of March 31, 2013, for a total return over the relevant time period of (4.91)%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of USMI of (4.91)% and the expected total return based on the SDMI of (4.91)% was an error over the time period of 0.00%, which is to say that USMI's actual total return performed nearly the same as the SDMI over the time period. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USMI earned interest income of $446, which was equivalent to a weighted average income rate of approximately 0.07% for such period. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USMI did not collect any fees from its Authorized Purchasers for creating or redeeming baskets of shares. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, USMI incurred net expenses of $5,872. Income from interest and Authorized Purchaser collections net of expenses was $(5,426), which is equivalent to an annualized weighted average net income rate of approximately (0.83)% for the three months ended March 31, 2013. 69



Factors That Can Impact Ability to Track the Applicable Index

There are currently three factors that have impacted or are most likely to impact a Trust Series' ability to accurately track an Applicable Index.

First, a Trust Series may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which such Trust Series executes the trade. In that case, a Trust Series may pay a price that is higher, or lower, than that of the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts, which could cause the changes in the daily per share NAV of a Trust Series to either be too high or too low relative to the daily changes in the price of the Applicable Index. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contracts at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price. However, it may not always be possible for a Trust Series to obtain the closing settlement price and there is no assurance that failure to obtain the closing settlement price in the future will not adversely impact a Trust Series' attempt to track the Applicable Index over time. Second, each Trust Series earns interest income on its cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries. A Trust Series is not required to distribute any portion of its income to its shareholders and none of the Trust Series made any distributions to shareholders during the three months ended March 31, 2014. Interest payments, and any other income, were retained within the portfolio and added to each Trust Series' NAV. At the same time, each Trust Series incurred expenses for its management fee, brokerage commissions and other expenses (including ongoing registration fees). The calculation of each Applicable Index includes an interest portion, calculated daily using the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill's total return, but does not include an expense component. When a Trust Series' income exceeds the sum of its expenses by the yield on the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill, such Trust Series realizes a net yield that tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of such Trust Series to track slightly higher than daily changes in the price of the Applicable Index. If this net yield is lower than the yield on the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill, that tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of such Trust Series to track slightly lower than daily changes in the price of the Applicable Index. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USCI earned, on an annualized basis, approximately 0.05% on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. It also incurred cash expenses on an annualized basis of (0.95)% for management fees, approximately (0.08)% in brokerage commission costs related to the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts, and approximately (0.11)% for other expenses. The foregoing fees and expenses resulted in a net yield on an annualized basis of approximately (1.09)% and affected USCI's ability to track its benchmark. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, CPER earned, on an annualized basis, approximately 0.05% on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. It also incurred cash expenses on an annualized basis of approximately (0.65)%* for management fees, approximately (0.06)% in brokerage commission costs related to the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts, and approximately (0.17)% for other net expenses. The foregoing fees and expenses resulted in a net yield on an annualized basis of approximately (0.83)% and affected CPER's ability to track its benchmark. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USAG earned, on an annualized basis, approximately 0.05% on its cash and cash equivalents holdings. It also incurred cash expenses on an annualized basis of approximately (0.80)%* for management fees, approximately (0.07)% in brokerage commission costs related to the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts, and approximately (0.17)% for other net expenses. The foregoing fees and expenses resulted in a net yield on an annualized basis of approximately (0.99)% and affected USAG's ability to track its benchmark. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, USMI earned, on an annualized basis, approximately 0.05% on its cash and cash equivalent holdings. It also incurred cash expenses on an annualized basis of approximately (0.70)%* for management fees, approximately (0.04)% in brokerage commission costs related to the purchase and sale of Futures Contracts, and approximately (0.17)% for other net expenses. The foregoing fees and expenses resulted in a net yield on an annualized basis of approximately (0.86)% and affected USMI's ability to track its benchmark. If short-term interest rates rise above the current levels, the level of deviation created by the yield would decrease. Conversely, if short-term interest rates were to decline, the amount of error created by the yield would increase. When short-term yields drop to a level lower than the combined expenses of the management fee and the brokerage commissions, then the tracking error becomes a negative number and would tend to cause the daily returns of the per share NAV to underperform the daily returns of the Applicable Index. USCF anticipates that interest rates will continue to remain at historical lows and, therefore, it is anticipated that fees and expenses paid by each Trust Series will continue to be higher than interest earned by each Trust Series. As such, USCF anticipates that each Trust Series will continue to underperform tracking the Applicable Index until such a time when interest earns at least equals or exceeds the fees and expenses paid by each Trust Series.



* Effective as of May 29, 2012 (and continuing through April 30, 2014), USCF

voluntarily waived the management fee paid by each of CPER and USAG from 0.95%

to 0.65% and 0.80% per annum of average daily total net assets, respectively.

Effective as of May 30, 2012 (and continuing through April 30, 2014), USCF

voluntarily waived the management fee paid by USMI from 0.95% to 0.70% per

annum of average daily total net assets. The reduced fee for USMI became

operational as of June 19, 2012, the date USMI became listed on the NYSE Arca.

Effective May 1, 2014 and continuing through December 31, 2015, USCF has

contractually agreed to lower the management fee to 0.80% per annum of average

daily total net assets for USCI, 0.65% per annum of average daily total net

assets for CPER, 0.65% per annum of average daily total net assets for USAG and

0.65% per annum of average daily total net assets for USMI. 70

Third, a Trust Series may hold Futures Contracts in a particular commodity other than the one specified as the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contract, or may hold Other Related Investments in its portfolio that may fail to closely track the Applicable Index's total return movements. Taking USCI as an example, assume for a given month one of the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts is the NYMEX WTI physically settled Futures Contract, trading under the symbol "CL," for the contract month of November 2012. It is possible that USCI could hold a NYMEX WTI financially settled Futures Contract, trading under the symbol "WS," for the contract month of November 2012. Alternatively, and using the same example, USCI could hold the ICE WTI financially settled Futures Contract, also for the contract month of November 2012. As a third example, USCI could hold the NYMEX WTI physically settled Futures Contract, trading under the symbol "CL," but for a contract month other than November 2012. Finally, a Trust Series could hold Other Related Investments. In any of these cases, the error in tracking the Applicable Index could result in daily changes in the per share NAV of a Trust Series that are either too high, or too low, relative to the daily changes in the price of the Applicable Index. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, none of the Trust Series held any Other Related Investments, but did, at times, hold Futures Contracts that were in months other than the months specified as the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contract. If any Trust Series increases in size, and due to its obligations to comply with regulatory limits or due to other market pricing or liquidity factors, such Trust Series may invest in Futures Contract months other than the designated month specified as the Applicable Benchmark Component Futures Contract, or in Other Related Investments, which may have the effect of increasing transaction related expenses and may result in increased tracking error. The SDCI The SDCI was developed based upon academic research by Yale University professors Gary B. Gorton and K. Geert Rouwenhorst, and Hitotsubashi University professor Fumio Hayashi. The SDCI is designed to reflect the performance of a fully margined or collateralized portfolio of 14 Eligible Commodity Futures Contracts with equal weights, selected each month from a universe of the 27 Eligible Commodity Futures Contracts. The SDCI is rules-based and rebalanced monthly based on observable price signals. In this context, the term "rules-based" is meant to indicate that the composition of the SDCI in any given month will be determined by quantitative formulas relating to the prices of the futures contracts that relate to the commodities that are eligible to be included in the SDCI. Such formulas are not subject to adjustment based on other factors. The overall return on the SDCI is generated by two components: (i) uncollateralized returns from the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts comprising the SDCI and (ii) a daily fixed income return reflecting the interest earned on a hypothetical 3-month U.S. Treasury Bill collateral portfolio, calculated using the weekly auction rate for the 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bills published by the U.S Department of the Treasury. SummerHaven Indexing is the owner of the SDCI.

The SDCI is composed of physical non-financial commodity futures contracts with active and liquid markets traded upon futures exchanges in major industrialized countries. The futures contracts are denominated in U.S. dollars and weighted equally by notional amount. The SDCI currently reflects commodities in six commodity sectors: energy (e.g., crude oil, natural gas, diesel-heating oil, etc.), precious metals (e.g., gold, silver platinum), industrial metals (e.g., zinc, nickel, aluminum, copper, etc.), grains (e.g., wheat, corn, soybeans, etc.), softs (e.g., sugar, cotton, coffee, cocoa), and livestock (e.g., live cattle, lean hogs, feeder cattle). 71 Table 1 below lists the eligible commodities, the relevant Futures Exchanges on which the Eligible Commodity Futures Contracts are listed and quotation details. Table 2 lists the Eligible Commodity Futures Contracts, their sector designation and maximum allowable tenor. TABLE 1 Commodity Designated Contract Exchange Units Quote High Grade Primary USD/metric Aluminum Aluminum LME 25 metric tons ton USD/metric Cocoa Cocoa ICE-US 10 metric tons ton U.S. Coffee Coffee "C" ICE-US 37,500 lbs cents/pound U.S. Copper Copper COMEX 25,000 lbs cents/pound U.S. Corn Corn CBOT 5,000 bushels cents/bushel U.S. Cotton Cotton ICE-US 50,000 lbs cents/pound



Crude Oil (WTI) Light, Sweet Crude Oil NYMEX 1,000 barrels USD/barrel

Crude Oil (Brent) Crude Oil ICE-UK 1,000 barrels USD/barrel USD/metric Gas Oil Gas Oil ICE-UK 100 metric tons ton Gold Gold COMEX 100 troy oz. USD/troy oz. U.S. Diesel-Heating Oil Diesel-Heating Oil NYMEX 42,000 gallons cents/gallon USD/metric Lead Lead LME 25 metric tons ton U.S. Lean Hogs Lean Hogs CME 40,000 lbs. cents/pound U.S. Live Cattle Live Cattle CME 40,000 lbs. cents/pound U.S. Feeder Cattle Feeder Cattle CME 50,000 lbs. cents/pound Natural Gas Henry Hub Natural Gas NYMEX 10,000 mm btu USD/mm btu USD/metric Nickel Primary Nickel LME 6 metric tons ton Platinum Platinum NYMEX 50 troy oz. USD/troy oz. U.S. cents/troy Silver Silver COMEX 5,000 troy oz. oz. U.S. Soybeans Soybeans CBOT 5,000 bushels cents/bushel Soybean Meal Soybean Meal CBOT 100 tons USD/ton U.S. Soybean Oil Soybean Oil CBOT 60,000 lbs. cents/pound U.S. Sugar World Sugar No. 11 ICE-US 112,000 lbs. cents/pound USD/metric Tin Tin LME 5 metric tons ton Unleaded Gasoline Reformulated Blendstock U.S. for Oxygen Blending NYMEX 42,000 gallons cents/gallon U.S. Wheat Wheat CBOT 5,000 bushels cents/bushel U.S./metric Zinc Zinc LME 25 metric tons ton 72 TABLE 2 Commodity Max. Symbol Commodity Name Sector Allowed Contracts Tenor CO Brent Crude Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 CL Crude Oil Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 QS Gas Oil Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 Diesel-Heating HO Oil Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 NG Natural Gas Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 XB RBOB Energy All 12 Calendar Months 12 FC Feeder Cattle Livestock Jan, Mar, Apr, May, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov 5 LH Lean Hogs Livestock Feb, Apr, Jun, Jul, Aug, Oct, Dec 5 LC Live Cattle Livestock Feb, Apr, Jun, Aug,



Oct, Dec 5

BO Soybean Oil Grains Jan, Mar, May, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Dec 7 C Corn Grains Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Dec 12 S Soybeans Grains Jan, Mar, May, Jul, Aug, Sep, Nov 12 SM Soymeal Grains Jan, Mar, May, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Dec 7 W Wheat (Soft Red Grains Winter) Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Dec 7 LA Aluminum Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar months 12 HG Copper Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar Months 12 LL Lead Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar Months 7 LN Nickel Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar Months 7 LT Tin Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar Months 7 LX Zinc Industrial Metals All 12 Calendar Months 7 GC Gold Precious Metals Feb, Apr, Jun, Aug, Oct, Dec 12 PL Platinum Precious Metals Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct 5 SI Silver Precious Metals Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Dec 5 CC Cocoa Softs Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Dec 7 KC Coffee Softs Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Dec 7 CT Cotton Softs Mar, May, Jul, Dec 7 SB Sugar Softs Mar, May, Jul, Oct 7 73 Prior to the end of each month, SummerHaven Indexing determines the composition of the SDCI and provides such information to Bloomberg, L.P. ("Bloomberg"). Values of the SDCI are computed by Bloomberg and disseminated approximately every fifteen (15) seconds from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, which also publishes a daily SDCI value at approximately 5:30 p.m., New York City time, under the index ticker symbol "SDCITR:IND." Only settlement and last-sale prices are used in the SDCI's calculation, bids and offers are not recognized - including limit-bid and limit-offer price quotes. Where no last-sale price exists, typically in the more deferred contract months, the previous days' settlement price is used. This means that the underlying SDCI may lag its theoretical value. This tendency to lag is evident at the end of the day when the SDCI value is based on the settlement prices of the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts, and explains why the underlying SDCI often closes at or

near the high or low for the day. Composition of the SDCI The composition of the SDCI on any given day, as determined and published by SummerHaven Indexing, is determinative of the benchmark for USCI. However, it is not possible to anticipate all possible circumstances and events that may occur with respect to the SDCI and the methodology for its composition, weighting and calculation. Accordingly, a number of subjective judgments must be made in connection with the operation of the SDCI that cannot be adequately reflected in this description of the SDCI. All questions of interpretation with respect to the application of the provisions of the SDCI methodology, including any determinations that need to be made in the event of a market emergency or other extraordinary circumstances, will be resolved by SummerHaven Indexing. Contract Expirations Because the SDCI is comprised of actively traded contracts with scheduled expirations, it can be calculated only by reference to the prices of contracts for specified expiration, delivery or settlement periods, referred to as contract expirations. The contract expirations included in the SDCI for each commodity during a given year are designated by SummerHaven Indexing, provided that each contract must be an active contract. An active contract for this purpose is a liquid, actively-traded contract expiration, as defined or identified by the relevant trading facility or, if no such definition or identification is provided by the relevant trading facility, as defined by standard custom and practice in the industry. If a Futures Exchange ceases trading in all contract expirations relating to a particular Futures Contract, SummerHaven Indexing may designate a replacement contract on the commodity. The replacement contract must satisfy the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the SDCI. To the extent practicable, the replacement will be effected during the next monthly review of the composition of the SDCI. If that timing is not practicable, SummerHaven Indexing will determine the date of the replacement based on a number of factors, including the differences between the existing Futures Contract and the replacement Futures Contract with respect to contractual specifications and contract expirations. If a contract is eliminated and there is no replacement contract, the underlying commodity will necessarily be dropped from the SDCI. The designation of a replacement contract, or the elimination of a commodity from the SDCI because of the absence of a replacement contract, could affect the value of the SDCI, either positively or negatively, depending on the price of the contract that is eliminated and the prices of the remaining contracts. It is impossible, however, to predict the effect of these changes, if they occur, on the value of the

SDCI. 74 Commodity Selection

Fourteen of the 27 Futures Contracts are selected for inclusion in the SDCI for the next month, subject to the constraint that each of the six commodity sectors is represented by at least one commodity. The methodology used to select the 14 Futures Contracts is based solely on quantitative data using observable futures prices and is not subject to human bias.



Monthly commodity selection is a two-step process based upon examination of the relevant futures prices for each commodity:

1) The annualized percentage price difference between the closest-to-expiration

Futures Contract and the next closest-to-expiration Futures Contract is

calculated for each of the 27 eligible Futures Contracts on the Selection

Date. The seven commodities with the highest percentage price difference are

selected.



2) For the remaining 20 eligible commodities, the percentage price change of each

commodity over the previous year is calculated, as measured by the change in

the price of the closest-to-expiration Futures Contract on the Selection Date

from the price of the closest-to-expiration Futures Contract a year prior to

the Selection Date. The seven commodities with the highest percentage price

change are selected. When evaluating the data from the second step, all six commodity sectors must be represented. If the selection of the seven additional commodities with the highest price change fails to meet the overall diversification requirement that all six commodity sectors are represented in the SDCI, the commodity with the highest price change among the commodities of the omitted sector(s) would be substituted for the commodity with the lowest price change among the seven additional commodities. The 14 commodities selected are included in the SDCI for the next month on an equally-weighted basis. Due to the dynamic monthly commodity selection, the sector weights will vary from approximately 7% to 43% over time, depending on the price observations each month. The Selection Date for the SDCI is the fifth business day prior to the first business day of the next calendar month. 75



The following graph shows the sector weights of the commodities selected for inclusion in the SDCI as of March 31, 2014.

USCI Sector Weights as of March 31, 2014 [[Image Removed]] Contract Selection For each commodity selected for inclusion into the SDCI for a particular month, the SDCI selects a specific Benchmark Component Futures Contract with a tenor (i.e., contract month) among the eligible tenors (the range of contract months) based upon the relative prices of the Benchmark Component Futures Contracts within the eligible range of contract months. The previous notwithstanding, the contract expiration is not changed for such month if a contract remains in the SDCI, as long as the contract does not expire or enter its notice period in

the subsequent month. Portfolio Construction

The portfolio rebalancing takes place during the last four business days of the month (the "Rebalancing Period"). At the end of each of the days in the Rebalancing Period, one fourth of the prior month portfolio positions are replaced by an equally-weighted position in the commodity contracts determined on the Selection Date. At the end of the Rebalancing Period, the SDCI takes an equal-weight position of approximately 7.14% in each of the selected commodity contracts. SDCI Total Return Calculation The value of the SDCI on any business day is equal to the product of (i) the value of the SDCI on the immediately preceding business day multiplied by (ii) one plus the sum of the day's returns for another version of the SDCI known as the SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity Index Excess Return ("SDCI ER") (explained below) and one business day's interest from hypothetical Treasuries. The value of the SDCI is calculated and published by Bloomberg. 76 SDCI Base Level



The SDCI was set to 100 on January 2, 1991.

SDCI ER Calculation The total return of the SDCI ER reflects the percentage change of the market values of the underlying commodity futures. During the Rebalancing Period, the SDCI changes its contract holdings during a four day period. The value of the SDCI ER at the end of a business day "t" is equal to the SDCI ER value on day "t-1" multiplied by the sum of the daily percentage price changes of each commodity future factoring in each respective commodity future's notional holding on day "t-1". Rebalancing Period During the Rebalancing Period, existing positions are replaced by new positions based on the signals used for contract selection as outlined above. At the end of the first day of the Rebalancing Period, the signals are observed and on the second day a new portfolio is constructed that is equally weighted in terms of notional positions in the newly selected contracts.



Hypothetical Performance of the SDCI

The table and chart below show the hypothetical performance of the SDCI from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT USCI WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM.



ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR TO ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS.



USCF HAS HAD LITTLE OR NO EXPERIENCE IN TRADING ACTUAL ACCOUNTS FOR CUSTOMERS. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS TO COMPARE TO THE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS, CUSTOMERS SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY WARY OF PLACING UNDUE RELIANCE ON THESE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS.

Since the SDCI was launched on December 18, 2009, there is only actual performance history of the SDCI from that date to the present. This data is available for periods prior to December 18, 2009. However, the components of the SDCI and the weighting of the components of the SDCI are established each month based on purely quantitative data that is not subject to revision based on other external factors. As a result, the tables below reflects how the SDCI would have performed from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 had it been in effect during such time period. The performance data does not reflect any reinvestment or distribution of profits, commission charges, management fees or other expenses that would have been incurred in connection with operating and managing a commodity pool designed to track the SDCI. Such fees and expenses would reduce the performance returns shown in the table below. 77 Hypothetical Performance Results* for the period from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 Year Ending Level* Annual Return 2004 592.26 23.58 % 2005 781.94 32.03 % 2006 1,115.82 42.70 % 2007 1,518.71 36.11 % 2008 1,175.77 (22.58 )% 2009 1,532.84 30.37 % 2010 1,852.04 20.82 % 2011 1,703.23 (8.03 )% 2012 1,726.55 1.37 % 2013 1,678.73 (2.77 )% 2014 (YTD) 1,758.97 4.78 % * The "base level" for the SDCI was set at 100 on January 2, 1991. The "Ending Level" represents the value of the components of the SDCI on the last trading day of each year and is used to illustrate the cumulative performance of the SDCI. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 78 SummerHaven Dynamic Commodity IndexSM Year-Over-Year Hypothetical Total Returns (2004-3/31/2014) [[Image Removed]] PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS



The following table compares the hypothetical total return of the SDCI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes for the period from December 31, 1997 to March 31, 2014.

Hypothetical and Historical



Results for the period from December 31,

1997 through March 31, 2014 DJ-UBS TR S&P GSCI TR DB LCI OY TR SDCI TR Total return 75 % 63 % 365 % 682 % Average Annual return (total) 6.61 % 7.16 % 12.38 % 15.63 % Annualized volatility 16.93 % 23.25 % 19.15 % 15.63 % Annualized Sharpe ratio 0.25 0.20 0.52 0.84



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 79

The table immediately above shows the performance of the SDCI from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014 in comparison with three traditional commodities indices: the S&P GSCI Commodity Index (GSCI®) Total Return, Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index Total ReturnSM, and the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Total ReturnTM. The S&P GSCI® Commodity Index Total Return is a composite index of commodity sector returns representing an unleveraged, long-only investment in commodity futures that is broadly diversified across the spectrum of commodities. The Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index Total ReturnSM is currently composed of futures contracts on a diversified basket of commodities traded on U.S. exchanges. The Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Total ReturnTM is designed to reflect the performance of certain wheat, corn, light sweet crude oil, diesel-heating oil, gold and aluminum futures contracts plus the returns from investing in 3-month U.S. Treasury Bills. The data for the SDCI Total Return Index is derived by using the SDCI's calculation methodology with historical prices for the futures contracts comprising the SDCI. The information about each of the indices comes from publicly-available material about such indices but is not designed to provide a thorough overview of the methodology of each index.

None of the indices has an investment objective identical to the SDCI. As a result, there are inherent limitations in comparing the performance of such indices against the SDCI. For more information about these indices and their methodologies, please refer to the material published by the sponsors of each such index which may be found on their websites. USCI is not responsible for any information found on such websites, and such information is not part of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q. In the table above, "Total Return" refers to the return of the relevant index from December 31, 1997 to March 31, 2014; "Annualized Volatility" is a measure of the amount of variation or fluctuation in the returns of the relevant index. Annualized Volatility is calculated by taking the monthly standard deviation of the relevant index's return and multiplying it by the square root of 12; and "Annualized Sharpe Ratio" is a measure of the total return of each relevant index adjusted by the risk-free interest rate (the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill yield) and the volatility of each index. Many investors consider volatility to be a measure of risk, and lower volatility of investment returns is considered a positive investment attribute as opposed to higher volatility. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is a standard measure for investors to compare two different investments or indexes that have different levels of volatility. If two indexes have the same total return, but one has lower Annualized Volatility, then its Annualized Sharpe Ratio will be higher. The higher the Annualized Sharpe Ratio, the better the risk-adjusted performance. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is calculated by taking the average monthly total return of the relevant index and subtracting the then current yield on the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill. The annualized return of this series is then divided by the Annualized Volatility of this series, and this result is the Annualized Sharpe Ratio for the relevant index. A higher Sharpe Ratio is not a guarantee that one investment or index will in the future produce better risk adjustment total returns, but USCF believes it is a useful tool for investors to consider when making investment decisions. 80



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDCI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes between March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2014.

10 Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS TR, S&P GSCI TR, DBLCI OY TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDCI TR (3/31/04-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 81



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDCI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes over a five year period.

5 Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS TR, S&P GSCI TR, DBLCI OY TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDCI TR (3/31/09-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS The SCITR The SCITR is a single-commodity index designed to be an investment benchmark for copper as an asset class. The SCITR is composed of copper futures contracts on the COMEX exchange. The SCITR attempts to maximize backwardation and minimize contango while utilizing contracts in liquid portions of the futures curve. The SCITR is rules-based and is rebalanced monthly based on observable price signals described below in the section "Contract Selection and Weighting." In this context, the term "rules-based" is meant to indicate that the composition of the SCITR in any given month will be determined by quantitative formulas relating to the prices of the futures contracts that are included in the SCITR. Such formulas are not subject to adjustment based on other factors. The overall return on the SCITR is generated by two components: (i) uncollateralized returns from the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts comprising the SCITR, and (ii) a daily fixed income return reflecting the interest earned on hypothetical 3-month Treasuries, calculated using the weekly auction rate for 3-Month Treasuries published by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. SummerHaven Indexing is the owner of the SCITR. Table 1 below lists the Futures Exchange on which the Eligible Copper Futures Contracts are listed and quotation details. Table 2 lists the Eligible Copper Futures Contracts, their sector designation and maximum allowable tenor. 82 TABLE 1 Commodity Designated Contract Exchange Units Quote Copper Copper COMEX 25,000 lbs U.S. cents/pound TABLE 2 Commodity Commodity Name Symbol Allowed Contracts Max.Tenor Copper HG All 12 calendar months 19 Prior to the end of each month, SummerHaven Indexing determines the composition of the SCITR and provides such information to the NYSE Arca. Values of the SCITR are computed by the NYSE Arca and disseminated approximately every fifteen (15) seconds from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, which also publishes a daily SCITR value at approximately 5:30 p.m., New York City time, under the index ticker symbol "SCITR". Only settlement and last-sale prices are used in the SCITR's calculation, bids and offers are not recognized - including limit-bid and limit-offer price quotes. Where no last-sale price exists, typically in the more deferred contract months, the previous days' settlement price is used. This means that the underlying SCITR may lag its theoretical value. This tendency to lag is evident at the end of the day when the SCITR value is based on the settlement prices of the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts, and explains why the underlying SCITR often closes at or

near the high or low for the day. Composition of the SCITR

The composition of the SCITR on any given day, as determined and published by SummerHaven Indexing, is determinative of the benchmark for CPER. Neither the index methodology for the SCITR nor any set of procedures, however, are capable of anticipating all possible circumstances and events that may occur with respect to the SCITR and the methodology for its composition, weighting and calculation. Accordingly, a number of subjective judgments must be made in connection with the operation of the SCITR that cannot be adequately reflected in this description of the SCITR. All questions of interpretation with respect to the application of the provisions of the index methodology for the SCITR, including any determinations that need to be made in the event of a market emergency or other extraordinary circumstances, will be resolved by SummerHaven Indexing. Contract Expirations

Because the SCITR is comprised of actively traded contracts with scheduled expirations, it can be calculated only by reference to the prices of contracts for specified expiration, delivery or settlement periods, referred to as contract expirations. The contract expirations included in the SCITR for each commodity during a given year are designated by SummerHaven Indexing, provided that each contract must be an active contract. An active contract for this purpose is a liquid, actively-traded contract expiration, as defined or identified by the relevant trading facility or, if no such definition or identification is provided by the relevant trading facility, as defined by standard custom and practice in the industry. If a futures exchange, such as the COMEX, ceases trading in all contract expirations relating to an Eligible Copper Futures Contract, SummerHaven Indexing may designate a replacement contract. The replacement contract must satisfy the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the SCITR. To the extent practicable, the replacement will be effected during the next monthly review of the composition of the SCITR. If that timing is not practicable, SummerHaven Indexing will determine the date of the replacement based on a number of factors, including the differences between the existing Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contract and the replacement contract with respect to contractual specifications and contract expirations. The designation of a replacement contract could affect the value of the SCITR, either positively or negatively, depending on the price of the contract that is eliminated and the prices of the replacement contract. It is impossible, however, to predict the effect of these changes, if they occur, on the value of the SCITR. 83



Contract Selection and Weighting

Weights for each of the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts are determined for the next month. The methodology used to calculate the SCITR weighting is based solely on quantitative data using observable futures prices and is not subject to human bias.

The monthly weighting selection is a process based upon examination of the relevant futures prices for copper:

1) On the Selection Date:



a) the copper futures curve is assessed to be in either backwardation or contango

(as discussed below); and



b) the annualized percentage price difference between the Closest-to-Expiration

Eligible Copper Futures Contract and each of the Next Four Eligible Copper

Futures Contracts is calculated. For each month, the Closest-to-Expiration

Eligible Copper Futures Contract and the Next Four Eligible Copper Futures

Contracts are as follows: Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Closest-to-Expiration Eligible Futures Contract February March April May June July August September October November December January Next Four April May June July August September October November December January February March Eligible May June July August September October November December January February March April Futures June July August September October November December January February March April May Contracts July August September October November December January February March April May June A futures curve in backwardation occurs when the price of the closest-to-expiration contract is greater than or equal to the price of the third closest-to-expiration contract. These contracts will have expirations that are approximately two months apart. A curve not in backwardation is defined as being in contango, which occurs when the price of the closest-to-expiration contract is less than the price of the third closest-to-expiration contract. 2a) Backwardation: If the copper futures curve is in backwardation on the Selection Date, the SCITR takes positions in the two Eligible Copper Futures Contracts with the highest annualized percentage price difference, each weighted at 50%. A hypothetical example is included below, with the two selected Eligible Copper Futures Contracts shaded below (the selected commodities are ranked 1 and 2): Copper Futures Contract Expiration Date Contract Price Nearest-to-maturity November-10 374.70 Third nearest-to-maturity January-11 365.20 Annualized Percentage Price Eligible Copper Futures Contracts Price Difference Ranking January-11 365.20 10.47 % 1 February-11 363.00 10.15 % 4 March-11 359.70 10.36 % 3 April-11 356.70 10.41 % 2 84 2b) Contango: If the copper futures curve is in contango, then the SCITR takes positions in three Eligible Copper Futures Contracts, as follows: first, the SCITR takes positions in the two Eligible Copper Futures Contracts with the highest annualized percentage price difference, each weighted at 25%; then, the SCITR also takes a position in the closest-to-expiration December Eligible Future Contract that has expiration more distant than the fourth of the Next Four Eligible Copper Futures Contracts for the applicable month, which position is weighted at 50%. A hypothetical example is included below, with the next two selected Eligible Copper Futures Contracts shaded below (the selected commodities are ranked

1 - 2): Expiration Copper Futures Contract Date Contract Price Nearest-to-maturity November-10 374.00 Third nearest-to-maturity January-11 375.70 Annualized Percentage Price Eligible Copper Futures Contracts Price Difference Ranking January-11 375.70 (1.97 )% 4 February-11 376.00 (1.78 )% 3 March-11 376.30 (1.59 )% 2 April-11 376.40 (1.37 )% 1 Due to the dynamic monthly weighting calculation, the individual weights will vary-over time, depending on the price observations each month. The Selection Date for the SCITR is the last business day of the calendar month.



The following graph shows the weights of the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts selected for inclusion in the SCITR as of March 31, 2014.

[[Image Removed]] 85 Portfolio Construction

The portfolio rebalancing takes place during the Rebalancing Period. At the end of each of the days in the Rebalancing Period one fourth of the prior month portfolio positions are replaced by the new weights for the Benchmark Component Copper Futures Contracts determined on the Selection Date.



SCITR Total Return Calculation

The value of the SCITR on any business day is equal to the product of (i) the value of the SCITR on the immediately preceding business day multiplied by (ii) one plus the sum of the day's returns for another version of the SCITR known as the SummerHaven Dynamic Copper Index Excess Return ("SCI ER") (explained below) and one business day's interest from the hypothetical Treasury Bill portfolio. The value of the SCITR will be calculated and published by

the NYSE Arca. SCITR Base Level



The SCITR was set to 100 on January 2, 1991.

SCI ER Calculation

The total return of the SCI ER reflects the percentage change of the market values of the underlying commodity futures. During the Rebalancing Period, the SCITR changes its contract holdings and weightings during a four day period. The value of the SCI ER at the end of a business day "t" is equal to the SCI ER value on day "t -1" multiplied by the sum of the daily percentage price changes of each commodity future factoring in each respective commodity future's notional holding on day "t -1". Rebalancing Period The SCITR is rebalanced during the first 4 business days of each calendar month, when existing positions are placed by new positions and weightings based on the signals used for contract selection on the last business day of the prior calendar month as outlined above.



Hypothetical Performance of the SCITR

The table and chart below show the hypothetical performance of the SCITR from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR TO ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. 86

USCF HAS HAD LITTLE OR NO EXPERIENCE IN TRADING ACTUAL ACCOUNTS FOR ITSELF OR FOR CUSTOMERS. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS TO COMPARE TO THE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS, CUSTOMERS SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY WARY OF PLACING UNDUE RELIANCE ON THESE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS. Since the SCITR was launched on November 4, 2010, there is no actual performance history of the SCITR to present. However, the components of the SCITR and the weighting of the components of the SCITR are established each month based on purely quantitative data that is not subject to revisions based on other external factors. This data is available for periods prior to November 4, 2010. As a result, the tables below reflects how the SCITR would have performed from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 had it been in effect during such time period. The performance data does not reflect any reinvestment or distribution profits, commission charges, management fees or other expenses that would have been incurred in connection with operating and managing a commodity pool designed to track the SCITR. Such fees and expenses would reduce the performance returns shown in the table below. Hypothetical Performance Results for the SCITR for the period from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 Year Ending Level* Annual Return 2004 310.819 48.40 % 2005 550.909 77.24 % 2006 911.128 65.39 % 2007 1,059.165 16.25 % 2008 497.182 (53.06 )% 2009 1,153.122 131.93 % 2010 1,491.949 29.38 % 2011 1,164.510 (21.95 )% 2012 1,223.150 5.04 % 2013 1,114.30 (8.90 )%

2014 (YTD) 995.85 (10.63 )% * The "base level" for the SCITR was set at 100 on January 2, 1991. The "Ending Level" represents the value of the components of the SCITR on the last trading day of each year and is used to illustrate the cumulative performance of the SCITR. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 87 SummerHaven Copper Index Year-Over-Year Hypothetical Total Returns (2004-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]] PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS



The following table compares the hypothetical total return of the SCITR in comparison with the actual total return of a major index from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014.

Hypothetical and



Historical Results for the period

from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014 DJ-UBS Spot Copper (less Copper TR storage) SCI TR Total return 334 % 145 % 536 %

Average annual return (total) 14.05 %

10.12 % 17.08 % Annualized volatility 27.93 % 26.94 % 27.28 % Annualized Sharpe ratio 0.42 0.29 0.53



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 88 The table above shows the performance of the SCITR from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014 in comparison with a traditional commodity index and spot copper prices: the Dow Jones-UBS Copper Subindex Total ReturnSM and spot copper prices less warehouse storage rents. The Dow Jones-UBS Copper Subindex Total ReturnSM includes the contract in the Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index Total Return that relates to a single commodity, copper (currently the Copper High Grade futures contract traded on the COMEX). The data for the SCI Total Return Index is derived by using the SCITR's calculation methodology with historical prices for the futures contracts comprising the SCITR. The information about the index above comes from publicly-available material about such index but is not designed to provide a thorough overview of the methodology of such index. The index noted above does not have investment objectives identical to the SCITR. As a result, there are inherent limitations in comparing such performance against the SCITR. For more information about the index and its methodologies, please refer to the material published by the sponsor of the Dow Jones-UBS Copper Subindex Total Return which may be found on its website. USCF is not responsible for any information found on such website, and such information is not part of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q. In the table above, "Total Return" refers to the return of the relevant index from December 31, 1997 to March 31, 2014; "Annualized Volatility" is a measure of the amount of variation or fluctuation in the returns of the relevant index. Annualized Volatility is calculated by taking the monthly standard deviation of the relevant index's return and multiplying it by the square root of 12; and "Annualized Sharpe Ratio" is a measure of the total return of each relevant index adjusted by the risk-free interest rate (the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill yield) and the volatility of each index. Many investors consider volatility to be a measure of risk, and lower volatility of investment returns is considered a positive investment attribute as opposed to higher volatility. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is a standard measure for investors to compare two different investments or indexes that have different levels of volatility. If two indexes have the same total return, but one has lower Annualized Volatility, then its Annualized Sharpe Ratio will be higher. The higher the Annualized Sharpe Ratio, the better the risk-adjusted performance. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is calculated by taking the average monthly total return of the relevant index and subtracting the then current yield on the 90-Day U.S. Treasury Bill. The annualized return of this series is then divided by the Annualized Volatility of this series, and this result is the Annualized Sharpe Ratio for the relevant index. A higher Sharpe Ratio is not a guarantee that one investment or index will in the future produce better risk adjustment total returns, but USCF believes it is a useful tool for investors to consider when making investment decisions. 89



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SCITR in comparison with the actual total return of a major index and spot copper prices (less storage cost) between March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2014.

10 Year Comparison of Index Returns of the S&P GSCI Copper TR, DJ-UBS Copper TR, Spot Copper price, Spot Copper Price less Storage Cost, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SCI TR (3/31/04-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg, LME

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 90



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SCITR in comparison with the actual total return of two major indices and spot copper prices (less storage cost) over a 5 year period.

Five Year Comparison Of Index Returns of the S&P GSCI Copper TR, DJ-UBS Copper TR, Spot Copper price, Spot Copper Price



less Storage Cost, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SCI TR (3/31/09-3/31/14)

[[Image Removed]] PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS



Source: SummerHaven Indexing, Bloomberg

The SDAI The SDAI is an agricultural sector index designed to broadly represent major agricultural commodities while overweighting the components that are assessed to be in a low inventory state and underweighting the components assessed to be in a high inventory state. The SDAI consists of fourteen agricultural markets: soybeans, corn, soft red winter wheat, hard red winter wheat, soybean oil, soybean meal, canola, sugar, cocoa, coffee, cotton, live cattle, feeder cattle and lean hogs. Each agricultural commodity is assigned a base weight based on an assessment of market liquidity and the commodity's overall economic importance. Each commodity is U.S. dollar based, with the exception of canola, which is quoted in Canadian dollars and converted to U.S. dollars for the purpose of the SDAI calculation. Academic research by Professors Gorton, Rouwenhorst and Hayashi has shown that commodities in relatively low inventory states tend to have higher returns than commodities in relatively high inventory states. Furthermore, relative inventory comparisons can be estimated by the price-based signals momentum and basis. Momentum is the percentage price change in a commodity over the previous year. Basis is the annualized percentage difference between the nearest-to-maturity contract and the second nearest-to-maturity contract. Using these price-based signals, agricultural commodities determined to be in low inventory state will be weighted more heavily, and agricultural commodities in high inventory state will be weighted less heavily during any given month. 91 The SDAI is rules-based and rebalanced monthly based on observable price signals described above. In this context, the term "rules-based" is meant to indicate that the composition of the SDAI in any given month will be determined by quantitative formulas relating to the prices of the futures contracts that relate to the commodities that are included in the SDAI. Such formulas are not subject to adjustment based on other factors. The overall return on the SDAI is generated by two components: (i) uncollateralized returns from the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts comprising the SDAI and (ii) a daily fixed income return reflecting the interest earned on a hypothetical 3-month U.S. Treasury Bill collateral portfolio, calculated using the weekly auction rate for the 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bills published by the U.S Department of the Treasury. SummerHaven Indexing is the owner of the SDAI. Table 1 below lists the eligible agricultural commodities, the relevant Futures Exchange on which each Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract is listed and quotation details. Table 2 lists the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts, their sector designation and maximum allowable tenor. TABLE 1 Designated Commodity Contract Exchange Units Quote Soybeans Soybeans CBOT 5,000 bushels U.S. cents/bushel Corn Corn CBOT 5,000 bushels U.S. cents/bushel Soft Red Winter Soft Red Winter Wheat Wheat CBOT 5,000 bushels



U.S. cents/bushel

Hard Red Winter Hard Red Winter Wheat Wheat KCBT 5,000 bushels U.S. cents/bushel Bean Oil Bean Oil CBOT 60,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Soybean Meal Soybean Meal CBOT 100 tons



USD/ton

Coffee Coffee "C" ICE-US 37,500 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Cocoa Cocoa ICE-US 10 metric tons USD/metric ton World Sugar No. Sugar 11 ICE-US 112,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Canola Canola ICE- CANADA 20 tonnes $CAD/tonne Cotton Cotton ICE-US 50,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Feeder Cattle Feeder Cattle CME 50,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Live Cattle Live Cattle CME 40,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound Lean Hogs Lean Hogs CME 40,000 lbs. U.S. cents/pound 92 TABLE 2 Commodity Name Commodity Symbol Allowed Contracts Max. Tenor Jan, Mar, May, July, Aug, Soybeans S Sep, Nov, 12 Corn C Mar, May, July, Sep, Dec 12 Soft Red Winter Wheat W Mar, May, July, Sep, Dec 7 Hard Red Winter Wheat KW Mar, May, July, Sep, Dec 5 Jan, Mar, May, July, Aug, Bean Oil BO Sep, Oct, Dec 7 Jan, Mar, May, July, Aug, Soybean Meal SM Sep, Oct, Dec 7 Coffee KC Mar, May, July, Sep, Dec 7 Cocoa CC Mar, May, July, Sep, Dec 7 Sugar SB Mar, May, July, Oct, 7 Canola RS Jan, Mar, May, July, Nov 5 Cotton CT Mar, May, July, Dec 7 Jan, Mar, April, May, Aug, Feeder Cattle FC Sep, Oct, Nov 5 Feb, April, June, Aug, Oct, Live Cattle LC Dec 5 Feb, April, June, July, Aug, Lean Hogs LH Oct, Dec 5 Prior to the end of each month, SummerHaven Indexing determines the composition of the SDAI and provides such information to the NYSE Arca. Values of the SDAI are computed by the NYSE Arca and disseminated approximately every fifteen (15) seconds from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, which also publishes a daily SDAI value at approximately 5:30 p.m., New York City time, under the index ticker symbol "SDAITR". Only settlement and last-sale prices are used in the SDAI's calculation, bids and offers are not recognized; including limit-bid and limit-offer price quotes. Where no last-sale price exists, typically in the more deferred contract months, the previous days' settlement price is used. This means that the underlying SDAI may lag its theoretical value. This tendency to lag is evident at the end of the day when the SDAI value is based on the settlement prices of the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts, and explains why the underlying SDAI often closes at or near the

high or low for the day. Currency Conversion

Canola seed futures trade on the ICE Futures Canada and are denominated in Canadian dollars. Canola futures prices are divided by the USD/CAD foreign exchange spot price for purposes of index calculation and commodity weighting calculations. The USD/CAD price used for canola futures for the daily SDAI value is the 3:00 p.m. EST USD/CAD price quoted by Bloomberg under currency ticker "USDCAD F150". Composition of the SDAI The composition of the SDAI on any given day, as determined and published by SummerHaven Indexing, is determinative of the benchmark for USAG. Neither the SDAI methodology nor any set of procedures, however, are capable of anticipating all possible circumstances and events that may occur with respect to the SDAI and the methodology for its composition, weighting and calculation. Accordingly, a number of subjective judgments must be made in connection with the operation of the SDAI that cannot be adequately reflected in this description of the SDAI. All questions of interpretation with respect to the application of the provisions of the SDAI methodology, including any determinations that need to be made in the event of a market emergency or other extraordinary circumstances, will be resolved by SummerHaven Indexing. 93 Contract Expirations Because the SDAI is comprised of actively traded contracts with scheduled expirations, it can be calculated only by reference to the prices of contracts for specified expiration, delivery or settlement periods, referred to as contract expirations. The contract expirations included in the SDAI for each commodity during a given year are designated by SummerHaven Indexing, provided that each contract must be an active contract. An active contract for this purpose is a liquid, actively-traded contract expiration, as defined or identified by the relevant trading facility or, if no such definition or identification is provided by the relevant trading facility, as defined by standard custom and practice in the industry. If a Futures Exchange ceases trading in all contract expirations relating to a particular Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract, SummerHaven Indexing may designate a replacement contract on the particular agricultural commodity. The replacement contract must satisfy the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the SDAI. To the extent practicable, the replacement will be effected during the next monthly review of the composition of the SDAI. If that timing is not practicable, SummerHaven Indexing will determine the date of the replacement based on a number of factors, including the differences between the existing Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract and the replacement contract with respect to contractual specifications and contract expirations. If a Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract is eliminated and there is no replacement contract, the underlying agricultural commodity will necessarily drop out of the SDAI. The designation of a replacement contract, or the elimination of an agricultural commodity from the SDAI because of the absence of a replacement contract, could affect the value of the SDAI, either positively or negatively, depending on the price of the contract that is eliminated and the prices of the remaining contracts. It is impossible, however, to predict the effect of these changes, if they occur, on the value of the SDAI. Commodity Weighting Each of the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts will remain in the SDAI from month to month. Weights for each of the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts in the SDAI are determined for the next month. The methodology used to calculate the SDAI weighting is based solely on quantitative data using observable futures prices and is not subject to human bias.



The monthly weighting selection is a three-step process based upon examination of the relevant futures prices for each agricultural commodity:

1) The annualized percentage price difference between the closest-to-expiration

Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract and the next

closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract is

calculated for each of the 14 eligible agricultural commodities on the fifth

business day prior to the first business day of the next calendar month (the

"Selection Date"). The four agricultural commodities with the highest percentage price difference are selected.



2) For the remaining 10 eligible agricultural commodities, the percentage price

change of each agricultural commodity over the previous year is calculated, as

measured by the change in the price of the closest-to- expiration Benchmark

Component Agriculture Futures Contract on the Selection Date from the price of

the closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract a

year prior to the Selection Date. The three agricultural commodities with the

highest percentage price change are selected.



3) For the seven commodities selected through basis (step 1) and momentum (step

2), each commodity weight is increased by 2% above its base weighting for the

following month. For the remaining seven commodities not selected, each

commodity weight is decreased by 2% below its base weighting for the following

month. Due to the dynamic monthly agricultural commodity weighting calculation, the individual agricultural commodity weights will vary over time, depending on the price observations each month. The Selection Date for the SDAI is the fifth business day prior to the first business day of the next calendar month. 94



The following graph shows the agricultural commodity weights of the agricultural commodities selected for inclusion in the SDAI as of March 31, 2014.

SDAI Commodity Weights as of March 31, 2014 [[Image Removed]] Contract Selection For each agricultural commodity in the SDAI, the index selects a specific Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract with a tenor (i.e., contract month) among the eligible tenors (the range of contract months) based upon the relative prices of the Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts within the eligible range of contract months. The previous notwithstanding, the contract expiration is not changed for that month if a Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contract remains in the SDAI, as long as the contract does not enter expire or enter its notice period in the subsequent month. Portfolio Construction

The portfolio rebalancing takes place during the Rebalancing Period. At the end of each of the days in the last four business days of each month (the "Rebalancing Period") one fourth of the prior month portfolio positions are replaced by the new commodity weights for the commodity contracts determined on the Selection Date. Currency Conversion



Canola futures are denominated and quoted in Canadian dollars.

SDAI Total Return Calculation

The value of the SDAI on any business day is equal to the product of (i) the value of the SDAI on the immediately preceding business day multiplied by (ii) one plus the sum of the day's returns for another version of the SDAI known as the SummerHaven Dynamic Agriculture Index Excess Return ("SDAI ER") (explained below) and one business day's interest from the hypothetical Treasury Bill portfolio. The value of the Agriculture will be calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. 95 SDAI Base Level



The SDAI was set to 100 on January 2, 1991.

SDAI ER Calculation The total return of the SDAI ER reflects the percentage change of the market values of the underlying Benchmark Component Agriculture Futures Contracts. During the Rebalancing Period, the SDAI changes its contract holdings and weightings during a four day period. The value of the SDAI ER at the end of a business day "t" is equal to the SDAI ER value on day "t -1" multiplied by the sum of the daily percentage price changes of each commodity future factoring in each respective commodity future's notional holding on day "t -1". Rebalancing Period During the Rebalancing Period, existing positions are replaced by new positions based on the signals used for contract selection as outlined above. At the end of the first day of the Rebalancing Period, the signals are observed and on the second day a new portfolio is constructed that is equally weighted in terms of notional positions in the newly selected contracts.



The table and chart below show the hypothetical performance of the SDAI from December 31, 2002 through March 31, 2014.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR TO ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. USCF HAS HAD LITTLE OR NO EXPERIENCE IN TRADING ACTUAL ACCOUNTS FOR ITSELF OR FOR CUSTOMERS. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS TO COMPARE TO THE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS, CUSTOMERS SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY WARY OF PLACING UNDUE RELIANCE ON THESE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS. Since the SDAI was launched on September 23, 2010, there is no actual performance history of the SDAI to present. However, the components of the SDAI and the weighting of the components of the SDAI are established each month based on purely quantitative data that is not subject to revisions based on other external factors. This data is available for periods prior to September 23, 2010. As a result, the tables below reflects how the SDAI would have performed from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 had it been in effect during such time period. The performance data does not reflect any reinvestment or distribution of profits, commission charges, management fees or other expenses that would have been incurred in connection with operating and managing a commodity pool designed to track the SDAI. Such fees and expenses would reduce the performance returns shown in the table below. 96 Hypothetical Performance Results for the period from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 Ending Year Level* Annual Return 2004 213.353 5.88 % 2005 231.652 8.58 % 2006 259.773 12.14 % 2007 315.849 21.59 % 2008 261.024 (17.36 )% 2009 282.237 8.13 % 2010 377.898 33.89 % 2011 348.780 (7.71 )% 2012 360.610 3.39 % 2013 324.11 (10.12 )% 2014 (YTD) 374.83 15.65 %



* The "base level" for the SDAI was set at 100 on January 2, 1991. The "Ending

Level" represents the value of the components of the Index on the last trading

day of each year and is used to illustrate the cumulative performance of the

Index. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 97 SummerHaven Dynamic Agriculture Index Year-Over-Year Hypothetical Total Returns (2004-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



source: Summerhaven Index Management, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS



The following table compares the hypothetical total return of the SDAI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014.

Hypothetical and Historical



Results for the period from December 31,

1997 through March 31, 2014 DJ-UBS Ag TR S&P GSCI Ag TR DB LCI OY Ag TR SDAI TR Total return (8 )% (44 )% 15 % 74 % Average annual return (total) 4.30 % 1.39 % 4.07 % 6.87 % Annualized volatility 20.45 % 21.14 % 19.50 % 15.54 % Annualized Sharpe ratio 0.10 (0.05 ) 0.08 0.31 The table above shows the performance of the SDAI from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014 in comparison with three traditional agricultural commodities indices: the S&P GSCI® Agriculture Index Total Return, Dow Jones-UBS Agriculture Total Return Sub-indexSM, and the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Agriculture Total ReturnTM. The S&P GSCI®Agriculture Index Total Return comprises the commodities: Wheat (Chicago and Kansas), Corn, Soybeans, Cotton, Sugar, Coffee, and Cocoa, and is part of a series of sub-indices representing components of the S&P GSCI. The Dow Jones-UBS Agriculture Total Return Sub-IndexSM is currently composed of seven futures contracts on agricultural commodities traded on U.S. exchanges. The Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Agriculture Total ReturnTM is designed to reflect the performance of certain corn, wheat, soybean and sugar futures contracts plus the returns from investing in 3 month U.S. Treasury Bills. The data for the SDAI Total Return Index is derived by using the SDAI's calculation methodology with historical prices for the futures contracts comprising the SDAI. The information about each of the indices comes from publicly-available material about such indices but is not designed to provide a thorough overview of the methodology of each index. None of the indices have investment objectives identical to the SDAI. As a result, there are inherent limitations in comparing the performance of such indices against the SDAI. For more information about these indices and their methodologies, please refer to the material published by the sponsors of each such index which may be found on their websites. USAG is not responsible for any information found on such websites, and such information is not part of this prospectus. 98 In the table above, "Total Return" refers to the return of the relevant index from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014; "Annualized Volatility" is a measure of the amount of variation or fluctuation in the returns of the relevant index. Annualized Volatility is calculated by taking the monthly standard deviation of the relevant index's return and multiplying it by the square root of 12; and "Annualized Sharpe Ratio" is a measure of the total return of each relevant index adjusted by the risk-free interest rate (the 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill yield) and the volatility of each index. Many investors consider volatility to be a measure of risk, and lower volatility of investment returns is considered a positive investment attribute as opposed to higher volatility. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is a standard measure for investors to compare two different investments or indexes that have different levels of volatility. If two indexes have the same total return, but one has lower Annualized Volatility, then its Annualized Sharpe Ratio will be higher. The higher the Annualized Sharpe Ratio, the better the risk-adjusted performance. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is calculated by taking the average monthly total return of the relevant index and subtracting the then current yield on the 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill. The annualized return of this series is then divided by the Annualized Volatility of this series, and this result is the Annualized Sharpe Ratio for the relevant index. A higher Sharpe Ratio is not a guarantee that one investment or index will in the future produce better risk adjustment total returns, but management believes it is a useful tool for investors to consider when making investment decisions. 99



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDAI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes between March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2014.

10 Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS Ag TR, S&P GSCI Ag TR, DB LCI OY Ag TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDAI TR (3/31/04-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Index Management, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 100



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDAI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes over a 5 year period.

Five Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS Ag TR, S&P GSCI Ag TR, DB LCI OY Ag TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDAI TR (3/31/09-3/31/2014) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Index Management, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS The SDMI The SDMI is a metal sector index designed to broadly represent industrial and precious metals while overweighting the components that are assessed to be in a low inventory state and underweighting the components assessed to be in a high inventory state.

The SDMI consists of ten metals - six base metals and four precious metals. The base metals are aluminum, copper, zinc, nickel, tin and lead. The precious metals are gold, silver, platinum and palladium. Each metal is assigned a base weight based on an assessment of market liquidity and the metal's overall economic importance. Academic research by Professors Gorton, Rouwenhorst and Hayashi has shown that commodities in relatively low inventory states tend to have higher returns than commodities in relatively high inventory states. Furthermore, relative inventory comparisons can be estimated by the price-based signals momentum and basis. Momentum is the percentage price change in a commodity over the previous year. Basis is the annualized percentage difference between the nearest-to-maturity contract and the second nearest-to-maturity contract. Using these price-based signals, metals determined to be in low inventory state will be weighted more heavily, and metals in high inventory state will be weighted less heavily during any given month. 101

The SDMI is rules-based and is rebalanced monthly based on observable price signals described above. In this context, the term "rules-based" is meant to indicate that the composition of the SDMI in any given month will be determined by quantitative formulas relating to the prices of the futures contracts that relate to the commodities that are included in the SDMI. Such formulas are not subject to adjustment based on other factors.



The overall return on the SDMI is generated by two components: (i) uncollateralized returns from the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts comprising the SDMI, and (ii) a daily fixed income return reflecting the interest earned on a hypothetical 3-month U.S. Treasury Bill collateral portfolio, calculated using the weekly auction rate for the 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bills published by the U.S Department of the Treasury. SummerHaven Indexing is the owner of the SDMI.

Table 1 below lists the eligible metals, the relevant Futures Exchange on which each Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract is listed and quotation details. Table 2 lists the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts, their sector designation and maximum allowable tenor. TABLE 1 Commodity Designated Contract Exchange Units Quote Aluminum High Grade Primary Aluminum LME 25 metric tons USD/metric ton Copper Copper COMEX 25,000 lbs U.S. cents/pound Lead Lead LME 25 metric tons USD/metric ton Nickel Primary Nickel LME 6 metric tons USD/metric ton Tin Tin LME 5 metric tons USD/metric ton Zinc Special High Grade Zinc LME 25 metric tons USD/metric ton Gold Gold COMEX 100 troy oz. USD/troy oz. Silver Silver COMEX 5,000 troy oz. U.S. cents/troy oz. Platinum Platinum NYMEX 50 troy oz. USD/troy oz. Palladium Palladium NYMEX 100 troy oz. USD/troy oz. TABLE 2 Commodity Max. Commodity Name Symbol Allowed Contracts Tenor Aluminum LA All 12 calendar months 12 Copper HG All 12 calendar months 12 Lead LL All 12 calendar months 7 Nickel LN All 12 calendar months 7 Tin LT All 12 calendar months 7 Zinc LX All 12 calendar months 7 Gold GC Feb, April, June, Aug, Oct, Dec 12 Silver SI March, May, July, Sep, Dec 5 Platinum PL Jan, April, July, Oct 5 Palladium PA March, June, Sept, Dec Prior to the end of each month, SummerHaven Indexing determines the composition of the SDMI and provides such information to the NYSE Arca. Values of the SDMI are computed by the NYSE Arca and disseminated approximately every fifteen (15) seconds from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., New York City time, which also publishes a daily SDMI value at approximately 5:30 p.m., New York City time, under the index ticker symbol "SDMITR". Only settlement and last-sale prices are used in the SDMI's calculation, bids and offers are not recognized; including limit-bid and limit-offer price quotes. Where no last-sale price exists, typically in the more deferred contract months, the previous days' settlement price is used. This means that the underlying SDMI may lag its theoretical value. This tendency to lag is evident at the end of the day when the SDMI value is based on the settlement prices of the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts, and explains why the underlying SDMI often closes at or near the

high or low for the day. 102 Composition of the SDMI The composition of the SDMI on any given day, as determined and published by SummerHaven Indexing, is determinative of the benchmark for USMI. Neither the SDMI methodology nor any set of procedures, however, are capable of anticipating all possible circumstances and events that may occur with respect to the SDMI and the methodology for its composition, weighting and calculation. Accordingly, a number of subjective judgments must be made in connection with the operation of the SDMI that cannot be adequately reflected in this description of the SDMI. All questions of interpretation with respect to the application of the provisions of the SDMI methodology, including any determinations that need to be made in the event of a market emergency or other extraordinary circumstances, will be resolved by SummerHaven Indexing. Contract Expirations Because the SDMI is comprised of actively traded contracts with scheduled expirations, it can be calculated only by reference to the prices of contracts for specified expiration, delivery or settlement periods, referred to as contract expirations. The contract expirations included in the SDMI for each commodity during a given year are designated by SummerHaven Indexing, provided that each contract must be an active contract. An active contract for this purpose is a liquid, actively-traded contract expiration, as defined or identified by the relevant trading facility or, if no such definition or identification is provided by the relevant trading facility, as defined by standard custom and practice in the industry. If a Futures Exchange ceases trading in all contract expirations relating to a particular Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract, SummerHaven Indexing may designate a replacement contract on the particular metal. The replacement contract must satisfy the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the SDMI. To the extent practicable, the replacement will be effected during the next monthly review of the composition of the SDMI. If that timing is not practicable, SummerHaven Indexing will determine the date of the replacement based on a number of factors, including the differences between the existing Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract and the replacement contract with respect to contractual specifications and contract expirations. If a Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract is eliminated and there is no replacement contract, the underlying metal will necessarily drop out of the SDMI. The designation of a replacement contract, or the elimination of a metal from the SDMI because of the absence of a replacement contract, could affect the value of the SDMI, either positively or negatively, depending on the price of the contract that is eliminated and the prices of the remaining contracts. It is impossible, however, to predict the effect of these changes, if they occur,

on the value of the SDMI. Commodity Weighting

Each of the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts will remain in the SDMI from month to month. Weights for each of the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts are determined for the next month. The methodology used to calculate the SDMI weighting is based solely on quantitative data using observable futures prices and is not subject to human bias.



The monthly weighting selection is a three-step process based upon examination of the relevant futures prices for each metal:

1) The annualized percentage price difference between the

closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract and the

next closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract is

calculated for each of the 10 eligible metals on the Selection Date. The

three metals with the highest percentage price difference are selected.

2) For the remaining seven eligible metals, the percentage price change of

each metal over the previous year is calculated, as measured by the change

in the price of the closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract on the Selection Date from the price of the closest-to-expiration Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract a year



prior to the Selection Date. The two metals with the highest percentage

price change are selected. 103



3) For the five metals selected through basis (step 1) and momentum (step 2),

each metal's weight is increased by 3% above its base weighting for the

following month. For the remaining five metals not selected, each metal's

weight is decreased by 3% below its base weighting for the following month.

Due to the dynamic monthly metal weighting calculation, the individual metal weights will vary over time, depending on the price observations each month. The Selection Date for the SDMI is the fifth business day prior to the first business day of the next calendar month.



The following graph shows the metal weights of the metals selected for inclusion in the SDMI as of March 31, 2014.

SDMI Commodity Weights as of March 31, 2014 [[Image Removed]] Contract Selection For each metal in the SDMI, the index selects a specific Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract with a tenor (i.e., contract month) among the eligible tenors (the range of contract months) based upon the relative prices of the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract within the eligible range of contract months. The previous notwithstanding, the contract expiration is not changed for that month if a Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract remains in the SDMI, as long as the contract does not enter expire or enter its notice period in the subsequent month. 104 Portfolio Construction

The portfolio rebalancing takes place during the Rebalancing Period. At the end of each of the days in the Rebalancing Period one fourth of the prior month portfolio positions are replaced by the new metals weights for the Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contract determined on the Selection Date. SDMI Total Return Calculation The value of the SDMI on any business day is equal to the product of (i) the value of the SDMI on the immediately preceding business day multiplied by (ii) one plus the sum of the day's returns for another version of the SDMI known as the SummerHaven Dynamic Metals Index Excess Return "SDMI ER" (explained below) and one business day's interest from the hypothetical Treasury Bill portfolio. The value of the SDMI will be calculated and published by the NYSE Arca. SDMI Base Level



The SDMI was set to 100 on January 2, 1991.

SDMI ER Calculation The total return of the SDMI ER reflects the percentage excess return equals the percentage change of the market values of the underlying Benchmark Component Metals Futures Contracts. During the Rebalancing Period, the SDMI changes its contract holdings and weightings during a four day period. The value of the SDMI ER at the end of a business day "t" is equal to the SDMI ER value on day "t-1" multiplied by the sum of the daily percentage price changes of each commodity future factoring in each respective commodity future's notional holding on

day "t-1". Rebalancing Period During the Rebalancing Period, existing positions are replaced by new positions based on the signals used for contract selection as outlined above. At the end of the first day of the Rebalancing Period, the signals are observed and on the second day a new portfolio is constructed that is equally weighted in terms of notional positions in the newly selected contracts.



The table and chart below show the hypothetical performance of the SDMI from December 31, 2002 through March 31, 2014.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR TO ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS. 105

USCF HAS HAD LITTLE OR NO EXPERIENCE IN TRADING ACTUAL ACCOUNTS FOR ITSELF OR FOR CUSTOMERS. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS TO COMPARE TO THE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS, CUSTOMERS SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY WARY OF PLACING UNDUE RELIANCE ON THESE HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS. Since the SDMI was launched on September 23, 2010, there is no actual performance history of the SDMI to present. However, the components of the SDMI and the weighting of the components of the SDMI are established each month based on purely quantitative data that is not subject to revisions based on other external factors. This data is available for periods prior to September 23, 2010. As a result, the tables below reflects how the SDMI would have performed from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 had it been in effect during such time period. The performance data does not reflect any reinvestment or distribution of profits, commission charges, management fees or other expenses that would have been incurred in connection with operating and managing a commodity pool designed to track the SDMI. Such fees and expenses would reduce the performance returns shown in the table below. Hypothetical Performance Results for the period from December 31, 2004 through March 31, 2014 Year Ending Level* Annual Return 2004 262.652 23.42 % 2005 347.386 32.26 % 2006 589.403 69.67 % 2007 669.439 13.58 % 2008 425.151 (36.49 )% 2009 735.929 73.10 % 2010 975.580 32.56 % 2011 823.695 (15.57 )% 2012 865.680 5.10 % 2013 727.17 (16.00 )% 2014 (YTD) 727.18 0.00 %



* The "base level" for the SDMI was set at 100 on January 2, 1991. The "Ending

Level" represents the value of the components of the Index on the last trading

day of each year and is used to illustrate the cumulative performance of the Index. 106 SummerHaven Dynamic Metals Index Year-Over-Year Hypothetical Total Returns (2004-3/31/2014 YTD) [[Image Removed]]



source: Summerhaven Index Management, Bloomberg

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS



The following table compares the hypothetical total return of the SDMI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes between December 31, 1997 and March 31, 2014.

Hypothetical and Historical Results



for the period from December 31,

1997 through March 31, 2014 DJ-UBS DB LCI OY Industrial RICI Industrial Metals TR Metals TR Metals TR SDMI TR Total return 129 % 314 % 191 % 476 % Average annual return (total) 9.21 % 11.70 % 10.97 % 14.46 % Annualized volatility 22.71 % 18.51 % 21.49 % 19.46 % Annualized Sharpe ratio 0.38 0.58 0.48 0.69 107 The table above shows the performance of the SDMI from December 31, 1997 through March 31, 2014 in comparison with three traditional metals indices: the Rogers International Commodity Index® - Metals Total Return, Dow Jones-UBS Industrial Metals Total Return Sub-indexSM, and the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Industrial Metals Total ReturnTM. The Rogers International Commodity Index® - Metals Total Return is an index of ten metals commodity futures contracts, representing commodities consumed in the global economy and is a sub-index of the Rogers International Commodity Index. The Dow Jones-UBS Industrial Metals Total Return Sub-IndexSM is currently composed of four futures contracts on industrial metals, three of which (aluminum, nickel and zinc) are traded on the London Metal Exchange and the other of which (copper) is traded on the COMEX division of the New York Mercantile Exchange. The Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Industrial Metals Total ReturnTMis designed to reflect the performance of certain futures contracts on aluminum, copper and zinc. The data for the SDMI Total Return Index is derived by using the SDMI's calculation methodology with historical prices for the futures contracts comprising the SDMI. The information about each of the indices comes from publicly-available material about such indices but is not designed to provide a thorough overview of the methodology of each index. None of the indices have investment objectives identical to the SDMI. As a result, there are inherent limitations in comparing the performance of such indices against the SDMI. For more information about these indices and their methodologies, please refer to the material published by the sponsors of each such index which may be found on their websites. USMI is not responsible for any information found on such websites, and such information is not part of this prospectus. In the table above, "Total Return" refers to the return of the relevant index from December 31, 1997 to March 31, 2014; "Annualized Volatility" is a measure of the amount of variation or fluctuation in the returns of the relevant index. Annualized Volatility is calculated by taking the monthly standard deviation of the relevant index's return and multiplying it by the square root of 12; and "Annualized Sharpe Ratio" is a measure of the total return of each relevant index adjusted by the risk-free interest rate (the 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill yield) and the volatility of each index. Many investors consider volatility to be a measure of risk, and lower volatility of investment returns is considered a positive investment attribute as opposed to higher volatility. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is a standard measure for investors to compare two different investments or indexes that have different levels of volatility. If two indexes have the same total return, but one has lower Annualized Volatility, then its Annualized Sharpe Ratio will be higher. The higher the Annualized Sharpe Ratio, the better the risk-adjusted performance. Annualized Sharpe Ratio is calculated by taking the average monthly total return of the relevant index and subtracting the then current yield on the 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill. The annualized return of this series is then divided by the Annualized Volatility of this series, and this result is the Annualized Sharpe Ratio for the relevant index. A higher Sharpe Ratio is not a guarantee that one investment or index will in the future produce better risk adjustment total returns, but management believes it is a useful tool for investors to consider when making investment decisions. 108



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDMI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes between March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2014.

10 Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS IM TR, RICI Metals TR, DB LCI OY IM TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDMI TR (3/31/04-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Index Management, Bloomberg, LME

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 109



The following chart compares the hypothetical total return of the SDMI in comparison with the actual total return of three major indexes over a 5 year period.

Five Year Comparison of Index Returns of the DJ-UBS IM TR, RICI Metals TR, DB LCI OY IM TR, and the Hypothetical Returns of the SDMI TR (3/31/09-3/31/14) [[Image Removed]]



Source: SummerHaven Index Management, Bloomberg, LME

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS 2014 Holiday Schedule The SDCI, SCITR, SDAI and SDMI will not be computed on the following weekdays in 2014: January 1January 20February 17April 18May 26July 4September 1November 27December 25



The holiday schedule is subject to change. USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI will also not accept Creation Baskets or Redemption Baskets on these days.

110



Critical Accounting Policies

Preparation of the condensed financial statements and related disclosures in compliance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the application of appropriate accounting rules and guidance, as well as the use of estimates. The Trust's application of these policies involves judgments and actual results may differ from the estimates used. USCF has evaluated the nature and types of estimates that it makes in preparing the Trust's condensed financial statements and related disclosures and has determined that the valuation of Applicable Interests, which are not traded on a United States or internationally recognized futures exchange (such as swaps and other over-the-counter contracts) involves a critical accounting policy. The values which are used by each Trust Series for its Futures Contracts are provided by its commodity broker who uses market prices when available, while over-the-counter contracts are valued based on the present value of estimated future cash flows that would be received from or paid to a third party in settlement of these derivative contracts prior to their delivery date and valued on a daily basis. In addition, each Trust Series estimates interest income on a daily basis using prevailing rates earned on its cash and cash equivalents. These estimates are adjusted to the actual amount received on a monthly basis and the difference, if any, is not considered material.



Liquidity and Capital Resources

None of the Trust Series has made, and does not anticipate making, use of borrowings or other lines of credit to meet its obligations. Each Trust Series has met, and it is anticipated that each Trust Series will continue to meet, its liquidity needs in the normal course of business from the proceeds of the sale of its investments, or from the Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents that it intends to hold at all times. Each Trust Series' liquidity needs include: redeeming shares, providing margin deposits for its existing Futures Contracts or the purchase of additional Futures Contracts and posting collateral for its over-the-counter Applicable Interests, respectively, if applicable, and, except as noted below, payment of its expenses, summarized below under "Contractual Obligations."

Each Trust Series currently generates cash primarily from: (i) the sale of baskets consisting of 50,000 shares ("Creation Baskets") and (ii) income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents. Each Trust Series has allocated substantially all of its net assets to trading in Applicable Interests. Each Trust Series invests in Applicable Interests to the fullest extent possible without being leveraged or unable to satisfy its current or potential margin or collateral obligations with respect to its investments in Applicable Interests. A significant portion of each Trust Series' NAV is held in cash and cash equivalents that are used as margin and as collateral for its trading in Applicable Interests. The balance of the assets is held in each Trust Series' account at its custodian bank and in Treasuries at the FCM. Income received from any investments in money market funds and Treasuries by a Trust Series will be paid to such Trust Series. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, each Trust Series' expenses exceeded the income it earned and the cash earned from the sale of Creation Baskets and the redemption of Redemption Baskets. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, each Trust Series used other assets to pay expenses, which could cause a decrease in its NAV over time. To the extent expenses exceed income, each Trust Series' NAV will be negatively impacted. Each Trust Series' investments in Applicable Interests may be subject to periods of illiquidity because of market conditions, regulatory considerations and other reasons. For example, most commodity exchanges limit the fluctuations in futures contract prices during a single day by regulations referred to as "daily limits." During a single day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. Once the price of a futures contract has increased or decreased by an amount equal to the daily limit, positions in the contracts can neither be taken nor liquidated unless the traders are willing to effect trades at or within the specified daily limit. Such market conditions could prevent a Trust Series from promptly liquidating its positions in Futures Contracts. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, none of the Trust Series purchased or liquidated any of its positions while daily limits were in effect; however, no Trust Series can predict whether such an event may occur in the future. 111 Prior to the initial offering of each Trust Series, all payments with respect to each Trust Series' expenses are paid by USCF. None of the Trust Series has an obligation or intention to refund such payments made by USCF. USCF is under no obligation to pay any Trust Series' future expenses. Since the initial offering of shares, each Trust Series has been responsible for expenses relating to: (i) management fees, (ii) brokerage fees and commissions, (iii) ongoing registration expenses in connection with offers and sales of its shares subsequent to the initial offering, (iv) other expenses, including tax reporting costs, (v) the fees of the Trustee in connection with its services as Delaware trustee of the Trust, (vi) fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF and (vii) other extraordinary expenses not in the ordinary course of business, while USCF has been responsible for expenses relating to the fees of the Trust Series' Marketing Agent, Administrator and Custodian, the trading advisory and licensing fees of SummerHaven Investment Management, LLC and offering expenses relating to the initial offering of shares of each Trust Series. If USCF and each Trust Series are unsuccessful in raising sufficient funds to cover these respective expenses or in locating any other source of funding, one or more of the Trust Series could terminate and investors may lose all or part of their investment. Market Risk Trading in Applicable Interests such as Futures Contracts involves each Trust Series entering into contractual commitments to purchase or sell specified amounts of commodities at a specified date in the future. The aggregate market value of the contracts will significantly exceed each Trust Series' future cash requirements since each Trust Series intends to close out its open positions prior to settlement. As a result, each Trust Series is generally only subject to the risk of loss arising from the change in value of the contracts. Each Trust Series considers the "fair value" of its derivative instruments to be the unrealized gain or loss on the contracts. The market risk associated with each Trust Series' commitments to purchase a specific commodity will be limited to the aggregate market value of the contracts held. Each Trust Series' exposure to market risk depends on a number of factors, including the markets for commodities, the volatility of interest rates and foreign exchange rates, the liquidity of the Applicable Interest markets and the relationships among the contracts held by each such Trust Series. The limited experience that each Trust Series has had in utilizing its model to trade in Applicable Interests in a manner intended to track the changes in the Applicable Index, as well as drastic market occurrences, could ultimately lead to the loss of all or substantially all of an investor's capital. Credit Risk When a Trust Series enters into Futures Contracts and Other Related Investments, it is exposed to the credit risk that the counterparty will not be able to meet its obligations. The counterparty for the Futures Contracts traded on the Futures Exchanges is the clearinghouse associated with the particular exchange. In general, in addition to margin required to be posted by the clearinghouse in connection with cleared trades, clearinghouses are backed by their members who may be required to share in the financial burden resulting from the nonperformance of one of their members and, therefore, this additional member support should significantly reduce credit risk. Some foreign exchanges are not backed by their clearinghouse members but may be backed by a consortium of banks or other financial institutions. Unlike in the case of exchange-traded Futures Contracts, the counterparty to an over-the-counter contract is generally a single bank or other financial institution. As a result, there will be greater counterparty credit risk in over-the-counter transactions. There can be no assurance that any counterparty, clearinghouse, or their members or their financial backers will satisfy their obligations to a Trust Series in such circumstances. USCF attempts to manage the credit risk of each Trust Series by following various trading limitations and policies. In particular, each Trust Series generally posts margin and/or holds liquid assets that are approximately equal to the market value of its obligations to counterparties under the Futures Contracts and Other Related Investments it holds. USCF has implemented procedures that include, but are not limited to, executing and clearing trades and entering into over-the-counter transactions only with creditworthy parties and/or requiring the posting of collateral or margin by such parties for the benefit of each Trust Series to limit its credit exposure. An FCM, when acting on behalf of each Trust Series in accepting orders to purchase or sell Futures Contracts on United States exchanges, is required by CFTC regulations to separately account for and segregate as belonging to a Trust Series, all assets of a Trust Series relating to domestic Futures Contracts trading. These FCMs are not allowed to commingle a Trust Series' assets with their other assets. In addition, the CFTC requires commodity brokers to hold in a secure account a Trust Series' assets related to foreign Futures Contracts trading. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the only foreign exchanges on which USCI made investments were the ICE Futures, which is a London based futures exchange, and the LME, which is a London based metal commodities exchange. Those Futures Contracts are denominated in U.S. dollars. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, CPER did not make investments on any foreign exchanges. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the only foreign exchange on which USAG made investments was the ICE Futures. Those Futures Contracts are denominated in U.S. dollars. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the only foreign exchange on which USMI made investments was the LME. Those Futures Contracts are denominated in U.S. dollars. 112



If, in the future, a Trust Series purchases over-the-counter contracts, see "Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk" in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for a discussion of over-the-counter contracts.

As of March 31, 2014, each of USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI held cash deposits and investments in Treasuries in the amount of $562,668,687, $3,162,361, $2,480,075 and $2,209,215, respectively, with the custodian and FCM. Some or all of these amounts may be subject to loss should the Trust Series' custodian and/or FCM cease operations. Off Balance Sheet Financing As of March 31, 2014, neither the Trust nor any Trust Series had any loan guarantee, credit support or other off-balance sheet arrangement of any kind other than agreements entered into in the normal course of business, which may include indemnification provisions relating to certain risks that service providers undertake in performing services which are in the best interests of any Trust Series. While each Trust Series' exposure under these indemnification provisions cannot be estimated, they are not expected to have a material impact on any Trust Series' financial position. European Sovereign Debt



None of the Trust Series had direct exposure to European sovereign debt as of March 31, 2014 or had direct exposure to European sovereign debt as of the filing of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.

Redemption Basket Obligation In order to meet its investment objective and pay its contractual obligations described below, each Trust Series requires liquidity to redeem shares, which redemptions must be in blocks of 50,000 shares called "Redemption Baskets." Each Trust Series has to date satisfied this obligation by paying from the cash or cash equivalents it holds or through the sale of its Treasuries in an amount proportionate to the number of shares being redeemed. Authorized Purchasers pay each Trust Series $350 for each order placed to create one or more Creation Baskets or to redeem one or more Redemption Baskets. Contractual Obligations The Trust's (and each series thereunder) primary contractual obligations are with USCF and certain other service providers. USCF, in return for its services, is entitled to a management fee calculated as a fixed percentage of a Trust Series' NAV. Effective as of May 29, 2012 (and continuing through April 30, 2014), USCF voluntarily waived the management fee paid by each of CPER and USAG from 0.95% to 0.65% and 0.80% per annum of average daily total net assets, respectively. Effective as of May 30, 2012 (and continuing through April 30, 2014), USCF voluntarily waived the management fee paid by USMI from 0.95% to 0.70% per annum of average daily total net assets. The reduced fee for USMI became operational as of June 19, 2012, the date USMI became listed on the NYSE Arca. Effective May 1, 2014 and continuing through December 31, 2015, USCF has contractually agreed to lower the management fee to 0.80% per annum of average daily total net assets for USCI, 0.65% per annum of average daily total net assets for CPER, 0.65% per annum of average daily total net assets for USAG and 0.65% per annum of average daily total net assets for USMI. Ongoing fees, costs and expenses of its operation for which a Trust Series is responsible include:



· brokerage and other fees and commissions incurred in connection with the

trading activities of each Trust Series;



· expenses incurred in connection with registering additional shares of each

Trust Series or offering shares of each Trust Series after the time any shares of each Trust Series have begun trading on the NYSE Arca; 113



· the routine expenses associated with distribution, including printing and

mailing, of any monthly, annual and other reports to shareholders required

by applicable U.S. federal and state regulatory authorities;



· payment for routine services of the Trustee, legal counsel and independent

accountants;



· payment for fees associated with tax accounting and reporting, routine

accounting, bookkeeping, whether performed by an outside service provider

or by affiliates of USCF; · costs and expenses associated with investor relations and services; · the payment of any distributions related to redemption of shares;



· payment of all federal, state, local or foreign taxes payable on the

income, assets or operations of each Trust Series and the preparation of

all tax returns related thereto; · fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF; and



· extraordinary expenses (including, but not limited to, indemnification of

any person against liabilities and obligations to the extent permitted by

law and required under the Trust Agreement and the bringing and defending

of actions at law or in equity and otherwise engaging in the conduct of

litigation and the incurring of legal expense and the settlement of claims

and litigation).

While USCF has agreed to pay registration fees to the SEC, FINRA, NYSE Arca or any other regulatory agency or exchange in connection with the initial offer and sale of the shares and the legal, printing, accounting and other expenses associated with such registration, each Trust Series is responsible for any registration fees and related expenses incurred in connection with any subsequent offer and sale of its shares after the initial offering of shares. Each Trust Series pays its own brokerage and other transaction costs. Each Trust Series pays fees to FCMs in connection with its transactions in Futures Contracts. For the three months ended March 31, 2014, FCM fees were approximately 0.08% of average daily total net assets for USCI, approximately 0.06% of average daily total net assets for CPER, approximately 0.07% of average daily total net assets for USAG and approximately 0.04% of average daily total net assets for USMI. In general, transaction costs on over-the-counter Applicable Interests and on Treasuries and other short-term securities are embedded in the purchase or sale price of the instrument being purchased or sold, and may not readily be estimated. USCF had voluntarily agreed to pay certain expenses normally borne by USCI to the extent that such expenses exceeded 0.15% (15 basis points) of USCI's NAV, on an annualized basis, through March 31, 2011. As of March 31, 2011, the expense waiver was no longer in effect for USCI. USCF has voluntarily agreed to pay certain expenses normally borne by each of CPER, USAG and USMI to the extent that such expenses exceed 0.15% (15 basis points) of each of CPER's, USAG's and USMI's NAV, on an annualized basis, through at least June 30, 2014. USCF has no obligation to continue such payments into subsequent periods. This voluntary expense waiver is in addition to those amounts USCF is contractually obligated to pay as described in Note 5 in Item 1 of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q. The parties cannot anticipate the amount of payments that will be required under these arrangements for future periods, as each Trust Series' NAVs and trading levels to meet its investment objective will not be known until a future date. These agreements are effective for a specific term agreed upon by the parties with an option to renew, or, in some cases, are in effect for the duration of a Trust Series' existence. Either party may terminate these agreements earlier for certain reasons described in the agreements. As of March 31, 2014, USCI's portfolio consisted of 16,564 Futures Contracts traded on the Futures Exchanges, CPER's portfolio consisted of 40 Futures Contracts traded on the COMEX, USAG's portfolio consisted of 70 Futures Contracts traded on the Futures Exchanges and USMI's portfolio consisted of 53 Futures Contracts traded on the Futures Exchanges. For a list of each of USCI's, CPER's, USAG's and USMI's current holdings, please see the Trust Series' website at www.unitedstatescommodityfunds.com. See "Portfolio Holdings" for a complete list of Futures Contracts held by each of USCI, CPER, USAG and USMI during the three months ended March 31, 2014.



114


For more stories on investments and markets, please see HispanicBusiness' Finance Channel



Source: Edgar Glimpses


Story Tools






HispanicBusiness.com Facebook Linkedin Twitter RSS Feed Email Alerts & Newsletters