CEFZ vs. UGA
CEFZ (RiverNorth Active Income ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFZ is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by RiverNorth, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. CEFZ is actively managed, while UGA is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. CEFZ charges 3.36%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.
Performance
CEFZ vs. UGA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFZ achieves a 3.57% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 64.09% return.
CEFZ
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- -1.00%
- YTD
- 3.57%
- 6M
- 3.99%
- 1Y
- —
- 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%
CEFZ vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 3.57% | 7.41% |
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP | 64.09% | -1.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFZ and UGA is -0.16, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025 | -0.16 |
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
CEFZ vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank
CEFZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
UGA
CEFZ vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RiverNorth Active Income ETF (CEFZ) 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.
| CEFZ | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.17 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.39 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEFZ vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFZ drawdown since its inception was -6.66%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFZ and UGA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFZ | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.66% | -86.59% | +79.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -18.96% | — |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.23% | -18.05% | +15.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.21% | -36.69% | +35.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 6.43% | — |
Volatility
CEFZ vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFZ | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 9.24% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 30.57% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.46% | 35.22% | -24.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.46% | 34.45% | -23.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.46% | 37.22% | -26.76% |
CEFZ vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEFZ has a 3.36% expense ratio, which is higher than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEFZ vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison
CEFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.40%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CEFZ RiverNorth Active Income ETF | 8.40% | 4.17% |
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFZ and UGA have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 3.36% for CEFZ.
CEFZ has the higher dividend yield at 8.40%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.
CEFZ is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while UGA is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: RiverNorth and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 3.36% for CEFZ and 0.75% for UGA.
Find the right allocation for CEFZ 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