TRACON Controller reported an airborne conflict when a departing air carrier did not comply with the SFO SEGUL1 departure and was overtaken in a turn by a subsequent dissimilar aircraft departing on the SFO SSTIK5 departure. Reporter stated SEGUL1 Departure is an unsafe procedure which may result in additional airborne conflicts.

Narrative

Aircraft X departed Rwy 01L at SFO on the SEGUL departure. Aircraft Y departed on the SSTIK departure behind Aircraft X also off Rwy 01L. I received a request from an aircraft southeast [off] of HAF looking for flight following southeast bound and a climb into the class bravo to 5500 ft. After radar identifying the VFR aircraft there was a couple of traffic calls made for opposite direction traffic at his verified altitude. I was focused on my VFR aircraft while Aircraft X flew the SEGUL departure extremely wide and out of place. Aircraft Y on the SSTIK departure had already made his turn nearly inside of Aircraft X in his turn southbound. Once observed I stopped Aircraft Y climb at 5000' for Aircraft X who was climbing out of 5800 ft unrestricted for FL190. I do believe Aircraft Y observed Aircraft X and stopped his climb on his own at 5000 while making his turn to the south after SSTIK. Regardless if I was the able to stop his climb or not these 2 departure procedures do not work when the SEGUL is first in line. There is something really wrong with this new SEGUL departure and it needs to be addressed sooner than later before there is a midair event with 2 aircraft flying their RNAV SID. I do believe the aircraft characteristics had an influencing factor in this situation. Aircraft Y was out climbing and performing Aircraft X and was able to cut in front of him even though he departed behind him. The SEGUL departure is dangerous and we will see more situations similar to mine if it's not addressed ASAP. My recommendation is go back to the OFFSHORE departure for now and remove the SEGUL from operation.