PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CEFA vs. UGA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CEFA vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFA achieves a 7.16% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 64.09% return.


CEFA

1D
-2.25%
1M
0.25%
YTD
7.16%
6M
6.74%
1Y
20.65%
3Y*
15.05%
5Y*
6.74%
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)

CEFA vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CEFA
Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF
7.16%26.46%5.03%17.40%-16.66%7.97%21.61%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
64.09%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%19.05%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFA and UGA is -0.30, 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

-0.30

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.07

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2020

0.07

The correlation between CEFA and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.30 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CEFA vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFA
CEFA Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
CEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
CEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CEFA vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) 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.


CEFAUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.30

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.80

3.17

-1.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.57

9.39

-2.82

CEFA vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is comparable to the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFA 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CEFA vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.97%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFA and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CEFAUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.97%

-86.59%

+54.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.54%

-18.96%

+7.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.45%

-26.68%

+11.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.97%

-38.11%

+6.14%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.29%

-18.05%

+15.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.00%

-36.69%

+29.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.15%

6.43%

-3.28%

Volatility

CEFA vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) is 5.65%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 9.24%. This indicates that CEFA 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CEFAUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.65%

9.24%

-3.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.62%

30.57%

-16.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.03%

35.22%

-19.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.73%

34.45%

-16.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.27%

37.22%

-19.95%

CEFA vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

CEFA vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

CEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CEFA
Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF
2.67%2.86%3.26%2.35%2.35%3.49%0.84%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CEFA and UGA have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (9.24%) compared to CEFA (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFA dropped -31.97% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 22.69% vs 6.74% for CEFA. On fees, CEFA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CEFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, UGA has performed better with a 22.69% return vs 6.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CEFA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

CEFA has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.

CEFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. CEFA tracks S&P Developed ex-U.S. Catholic Values Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CEFA and 0.75% for UGA.

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.29), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CEFA and UGA

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