AIFD vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AIFD (TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - AIFD is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by TCW, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. AIFD is actively managed, while UGA is passively managed. Over the past year, AIFD returned 79.52% vs 59.74% for UGA. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

AIFD vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIFD achieves a 39.56% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 64.09% return.

AIFD

• 1D: -4.95%
• 1M: 2.31%
• YTD: 39.56%
• 6M: 37.82%
• 1Y: 79.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UGA

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: -12.11%
• YTD: 64.09%
• 6M: 60.42%
• 1Y: 59.74%
• 3Y*: 18.95%
• 5Y*: 22.69%
• 10Y*: 14.31%

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

AIFD vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AIFD TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF	39.56%	28.30%	15.22%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	64.09%	-2.00%	-6.96%

Correlation

The correlation between AIFD and UGA is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2024	-0.00

The correlation between AIFD and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to -0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

AIFD vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIFD

AIFD Risk / Return Rank: 88
AIFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
AIFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
AIFD Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AIFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
AIFD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 55
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 49
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 56

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AIFD vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AIFD	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.88	1.73	+1.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	2.25	+1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.30	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.80	3.17	+3.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	25.05	9.39	+15.65

AIFD vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIFD Sharpe Ratio is 2.88, which is higher than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIFD and UGA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AIFD vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIFD drawdown since its inception was -33.20%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIFD and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIFD	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.20%	-86.59%	+53.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.75%	-18.96%	+7.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.68%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.11%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.46%	-18.05%	+9.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.73%	-36.69%	+30.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.19%	6.43%	-3.24%

Volatility

AIFD vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

TCW Artificial Intelligence ETF (AIFD) has a higher volatility of 13.42% compared to United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) at 9.24%. This indicates that AIFD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIFD	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.42%	9.24%	+4.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.17%	30.57%	-8.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.76%	35.22%	-7.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.99%	34.45%	-4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.99%	37.22%	-7.23%

AIFD vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AIFD and UGA have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

AIFD vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither AIFD nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIFD and UGA in my portfolio?

AIFD and UGA have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIFD or UGA?

AIFD has higher volatility (13.42%) compared to UGA (9.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIFD dropped -33.20% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, AIFD or UGA?

On 1-year performance, AIFD leads with 79.52% vs 59.74% for UGA. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, UGA has been the lower-risk option at 9.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIFD or UGA?

Over the 1-year period, AIFD has performed better with a 79.52% return vs 59.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIFD or UGA?

AIFD and UGA have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIFD or UGA?

AIFD and UGA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AIFD and UGA?

AIFD is categorized as Technology Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: TCW and Concierge Technologies.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.88 vs 1.73), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.