ESBG vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

ESBG (First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ESBG is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by First Trust, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. ESBG charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

ESBG vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESBG achieves a -3.89% return, which is significantly lower than UMI's 22.33% return.

ESBG

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: -8.93%
• YTD: -3.89%
• 6M: -7.20%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UMI

• 1D: -1.09%
• 1M: -4.82%
• YTD: 22.33%
• 6M: 22.03%
• 1Y: 24.98%
• 3Y*: 28.04%
• 5Y*: 20.42%
• 10Y*: —

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

ESBG vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	-3.89%	5.67%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	22.33%	1.09%

Correlation

The correlation between ESBG and UMI is -0.03, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2025	-0.03

Return for Risk

ESBG vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESBG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 60
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 54
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

ESBG vs. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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.

	ESBG	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.75	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.43	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.30	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.35	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	8.57	—

Drawdowns

ESBG vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESBG drawdown since its inception was -18.84%, smaller than the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESBG and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESBG	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.84%	-48.08%	+29.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.50%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.05%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.50%	-4.90%	-13.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.02%	-6.58%	-0.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.92%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ESBG	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.57%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.17%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.31%	14.31%	+12.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.31%	19.47%	+6.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.31%	23.15%	+3.16%

ESBG vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESBG has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESBG vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

ESBG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, less than UMI's 5.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF	0.63%	0.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	5.88%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESBG and UMI in my portfolio?

ESBG and UMI have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESBG or UMI?

On fees, UMI is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESBG or UMI?

UMI is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ESBG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ESBG or UMI?

UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.88%, compared with 0.63% for ESBG.

What is the main difference between ESBG and UMI?

ESBG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ESBG and 0.85% for UMI.