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

Performance

EWA vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) 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, EWA achieves a 10.88% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 70.69% return. Over the past 10 years, EWA has underperformed UGA with an annualized return of 8.25%, while UGA has yielded a comparatively higher 14.27% annualized return.


EWA

1D
-0.34%
1M
-0.51%
YTD
10.88%
6M
12.35%
1Y
13.90%
3Y*
12.73%
5Y*
5.43%
10Y*
8.25%

UGA

1D
-2.73%
1M
-12.25%
YTD
70.69%
6M
59.72%
1Y
79.48%
3Y*
20.80%
5Y*
24.41%
10Y*
14.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EWA vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF
10.88%13.35%1.60%13.81%-5.92%8.93%8.29%22.45%-12.04%19.88%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
70.69%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%41.25%-28.07%1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between EWA and UGA is -0.27, 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

-0.27

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

-0.02

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

0.14

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

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 29, 2008

0.30

The correlation between EWA and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.27 (1 year) to 0.30 (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

EWA vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWA
EWA Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
EWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWA Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
EWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWA Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

EWA vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) 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.


EWAUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.37

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.39

5.37

-3.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.98

12.86

-8.88

EWA vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.83, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWA 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


EWAUGADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

2.27

-1.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.71

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

0.38

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.12

+0.17

Drawdowns

EWA vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWA drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWA and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EWAUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.98%

-86.59%

+19.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.01%

-14.88%

+4.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.91%

-26.68%

+4.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.87%

-38.11%

+13.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.54%

-75.89%

+30.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.03%

-14.75%

+10.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.33%

-36.76%

+25.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.50%

6.20%

-2.70%

Volatility

EWA vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) is 5.36%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 11.64%. This indicates that EWA 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


EWAUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.36%

11.64%

-6.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.97%

30.48%

-16.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.87%

35.27%

-18.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.71%

34.40%

-14.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.60%

37.27%

-14.67%

EWA vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

EWA vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

EWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF
2.90%3.21%3.71%3.72%5.28%5.08%2.02%3.97%6.11%4.44%4.03%5.48%
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


EWA and UGA have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (11.64%) compared to EWA (5.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWA dropped -66.98% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 14.27% vs 8.25% for EWA. On fees, EWA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EWA has been the lower-risk option at 5.36%. 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 14.27% return vs 8.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EWA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

EWA has the higher dividend yield at 2.90%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.

EWA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWA and 0.75% for UGA.

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 0.83), 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 EWA 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