CPSF vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 20, 2026

CPSF (Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - CPSF is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Calamos, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. CPSF is actively managed, while UGA is passively managed. Over the past year, CPSF returned 7.68% vs 54.24% for UGA. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. CPSF charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

CPSF vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February (CPSF) 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, CPSF achieves a 2.44% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 65.71% return.

CPSF

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 2.44%
• 6M: 2.70%
• 1Y: 7.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UGA

• 1D: 2.13%
• 1M: -12.31%
• YTD: 65.71%
• 6M: 65.60%
• 1Y: 54.24%
• 3Y*: 17.25%
• 5Y*: 24.13%
• 10Y*: 14.05%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CPSF vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CPSF Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February	2.44%	6.14%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	65.71%	-3.53%

Correlation

The correlation between CPSF and UGA is -0.24, 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	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2025	-0.13

The correlation between CPSF and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to -0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CPSF vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPSF

CPSF Risk / Return Rank: 95
CPSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CPSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
CPSF Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CPSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CPSF Martin Ratio Rank: 95

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 48
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 43
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

CPSF vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February (CPSF) 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.

	CPSF	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.66	1.55	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.84	2.05	+3.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.80	1.27	+0.53
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.94	2.87	+3.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	28.68	7.80	+20.88

CPSF vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPSF Sharpe Ratio is 3.66, which is higher than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPSF 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

CPSF vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPSF drawdown since its inception was -2.89%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPSF and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPSF	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.89%	-86.59%	+83.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.30%	-18.96%	+17.66%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-17.24%	+17.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.35%	-36.70%	+36.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.27%	6.97%	-6.70%

Volatility

CPSF vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February (CPSF) is 0.67%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 10.31%. This indicates that CPSF 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

	CPSF	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.67%	10.31%	-9.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.49%	30.57%	-29.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.11%	35.23%	-33.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.81%	34.45%	-31.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.81%	37.25%	-34.44%

CPSF vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPSF has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPSF vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPSF nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CPSF and UGA in my portfolio?

CPSF and UGA have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CPSF or UGA?

UGA has higher volatility (10.31%) compared to CPSF (0.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPSF dropped -2.89% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, CPSF or UGA?

On 1-year performance, UGA leads with 54.24% vs 7.68% for CPSF. On fees, CPSF is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CPSF or UGA?

Over the 1-year period, UGA has performed better with a 54.24% return vs 7.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CPSF or UGA?

CPSF is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

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

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

What is the main difference between CPSF and UGA?

CPSF is categorized as Defined Outcome, while UGA is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CPSF and 0.75% for UGA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.66 vs 1.55), 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.