PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CFA vs. UGA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CFA vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CFA (VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - CFA is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Volatility Weighted Index, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CFA returned 11.41%/yr vs 14.43%/yr for UGA. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CFA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

CFA vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA) 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, CFA achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 75.49% return. Over the past 10 years, CFA has underperformed UGA with an annualized return of 11.41%, while UGA has yielded a comparatively higher 14.43% annualized return.

CFA

1D
-0.30%
1M
1.81%
YTD
6.66%
6M
6.96%
1Y
13.49%
3Y*
13.78%
5Y*
7.77%
10Y*
11.41%

UGA

1D
-0.19%
1M
-12.35%
YTD
75.49%
6M
64.35%
1Y
80.94%
3Y*
22.21%
5Y*
25.10%
10Y*
14.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CFA vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CFA
VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF		6.66%8.63%15.34%11.85%-11.39%26.09%11.98%30.15%-8.62%22.47%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP		75.49%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%41.25%-28.07%1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between CFA and UGA is -0.22, 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

-0.22

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

-0.04

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

0.10

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2014

0.18

The correlation between CFA and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.18 (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.

VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF

United States Gasoline Fund LP

Often compared with CFA:
CFA vs. BDGSCFA vs. CFOCFA vs. SPYCFA vs. CDCCFA vs. XLGCFA vs. LGLVCFA vs. VONG
Often compared with UGA:
UGA vs. URAUGA vs. FCGUGA vs. QQQUGA vs. VOOUGA vs. USOUGA vs. SPYUGA vs. FNGS

Return for Risk

CFA vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CFA
CFA Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
CFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CFA Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
CFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
CFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

CFA vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA) 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.

CFAUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.27
2.32

-1.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.89
2.75

-0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.37

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

5.47

-3.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.03

13.25

-6.22

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CFA vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFA 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CFAUGADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.27

2.32

-1.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.73

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

0.39

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.12

+0.50

Drawdowns

CFA vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFA drawdown since its inception was -37.74%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFA and UGA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CFAUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.74%

-86.59%

+48.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.13%

-14.88%

+7.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.28%

-26.68%

+9.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.88%

-38.11%

+17.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.74%

-75.89%

+38.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

-12.35%

+12.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.17%

-36.76%

+32.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.92%

6.13%

-4.21%

Volatility

CFA vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA) is 2.40%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 11.66%. This indicates that CFA 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

CFAUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.40%

11.66%

-9.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.82%

30.41%

-22.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.70%

35.14%

-24.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.06%

34.38%

-19.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.21%

37.27%

-20.06%

CFA vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CFA vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

CFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CFA
VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF		1.24%1.29%1.32%1.42%1.59%1.04%1.21%1.35%1.50%1.15%1.37%1.31%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CFA and UGA have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (11.66%) compared to CFA (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFA dropped -37.74% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 14.43% vs 11.41% for CFA. On fees, CFA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CFA has been the lower-risk option at 2.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UGA has performed better with a 14.43% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

CFA has the higher dividend yield at 1.24%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.

CFA is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. CFA tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Volatility Weighted Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFA and 0.75% for UGA.

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.27), 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 CFA 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