CANE vs. UNG
CANE (Teucrium Sugar Fund) and UNG (United States Natural Gas Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - CANE is a Agricultural Commodities fund tracking the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark, while UNG is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Natural Gas. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CANE returned -2.23%/yr vs -20.48%/yr for UNG. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CANE charges 1.88%/yr vs 1.28%/yr for UNG.
Performance
CANE vs. UNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly higher than UNG's -4.49% return. Over the past 10 years, CANE has outperformed UNG with an annualized return of -2.23%, while UNG has yielded a comparatively lower -20.48% annualized return.
CANE
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- -5.56%
- YTD
- -0.77%
- 6M
- 0.83%
- 1Y
- -14.28%
- 3Y*
- -10.43%
- 5Y*
- 2.90%
- 10Y*
- -2.23%
UNG
- 1D
- 2.09%
- 1M
- 6.94%
- YTD
- -4.49%
- 6M
- -24.31%
- 1Y
- -30.96%
- 3Y*
- -21.19%
- 5Y*
- -23.11%
- 10Y*
- -20.48%
CANE vs. UNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CANE Teucrium Sugar Fund | -0.77% | -14.65% | -7.79% | 30.06% | 3.59% | 36.30% | -3.85% | -0.97% | -27.52% | -24.76% |
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | -4.49% | -27.07% | -17.11% | -64.04% | 12.89% | 35.76% | -45.43% | -31.77% | 5.96% | -37.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANE and UNG is 0.00, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2011 | 0.04 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CANE vs. UNG — Risk / Return Rank
CANE
UNG
CANE vs. UNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG). 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.
| CANE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 0.95 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.72 | -0.71 | -0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.18 | -1.04 | -0.13 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CANE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.69 | -0.51 | -0.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 | -0.36 | +0.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.10 | -0.37 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.26 | -0.57 | +0.31 |
Drawdowns
CANE vs. UNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, smaller than the maximum UNG drawdown of -99.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and UNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -81.30% | -99.88% | +18.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.89% | -43.86% | +23.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -41.73% | -68.16% | +26.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.73% | -92.49% | +50.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.29% | -93.55% | +26.26% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -63.21% | -99.86% | +36.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.50% | -89.96% | +33.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.35% | 29.68% | -17.33% |
Volatility
CANE vs. UNG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) is 6.85%, while United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) has a volatility of 13.09%. This indicates that CANE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.85% | 13.09% | -6.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.81% | 52.96% | -37.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.69% | 60.48% | -39.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.07% | 64.10% | -43.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.72% | 54.78% | -33.06% |
CANE vs. UNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than UNG's 1.28% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANE vs. UNG - Dividend Comparison
Neither CANE nor UNG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CANE and UNG have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UNG has higher volatility (13.09%) compared to CANE (6.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANE dropped -81.30% vs UNG's -99.88%.
On 10-year performance, CANE leads with -2.23% vs -20.48% for UNG. On fees, UNG is cheaper at 1.28% per year. On volatility, CANE has been the lower-risk option at 6.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CANE has performed better with a -2.23% return vs -20.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UNG is cheaper with a 1.28% expense ratio, compared with 1.88% for CANE.
CANE and UNG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
CANE is categorized as Agricultural Commodities, while UNG is Oil & Gas. CANE tracks Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark, while UNG tracks Front Month Natural Gas. They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 1.88% for CANE and 1.28% for UNG.
UNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.51 vs -0.69), 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.
Find the right allocation for CANE and UNG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer