BUYZ vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BUYZ (Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - BUYZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. BUYZ is actively managed, while UGA is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BUYZ returned -9.15%/yr vs 22.69%/yr for UGA. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BUYZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

BUYZ vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) 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, BUYZ achieves a -17.33% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 64.09% return.

BUYZ

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: -2.91%
• YTD: -17.33%
• 6M: -18.11%
• 1Y: -15.11%
• 3Y*: 9.22%
• 5Y*: -9.15%
• 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)

BUYZ vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BUYZ Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF	-17.33%	8.70%	28.25%	39.13%	-49.81%	-19.38%	117.10%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	64.09%	-2.00%	3.77%	1.27%	46.34%	68.49%	-7.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BUYZ and UGA is -0.19, 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	-0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.04
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020	0.10

The correlation between BUYZ and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to 0.10 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BUYZ vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUYZ

BUYZ Risk / Return Rank: 4
BUYZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
BUYZ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

BUYZ vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) 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.

	BUYZ	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.67	1.73	-2.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.80	2.25	-3.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.30	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.49	3.17	-3.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.94	9.39	-10.33

BUYZ vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUYZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.67, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUYZ 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

BUYZ vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUYZ drawdown since its inception was -68.04%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUYZ and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUYZ	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.04%	-86.59%	+18.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.85%	-18.96%	-11.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.85%	-26.68%	-4.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-63.32%	-38.11%	-25.21%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-46.64%	-18.05%	-28.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.79%	-36.69%	-2.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.14%	6.43%	+9.71%

Volatility

BUYZ vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) is 6.83%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 9.24%. This indicates that BUYZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUYZ	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.83%	9.24%	-2.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.74%	30.57%	-12.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.70%	35.22%	-12.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.22%	34.45%	-7.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.89%	37.22%	-7.33%

BUYZ vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUYZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUYZ vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUYZ nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BUYZ Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.07%	0.00%	0.00%	0.77%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUYZ and UGA in my portfolio?

BUYZ and UGA have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUYZ or UGA?

UGA has higher volatility (9.24%) compared to BUYZ (6.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUYZ dropped -68.04% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, BUYZ or UGA?

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 22.69% vs -9.15% for BUYZ. On fees, BUYZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUYZ has been the lower-risk option at 6.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUYZ or UGA?

Over the 5-year period, UGA has performed better with a 22.69% return vs -9.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUYZ or UGA?

BUYZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

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

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

What is the main difference between BUYZ and UGA?

BUYZ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUYZ and 0.75% for UGA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs -0.67), 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.