FCG vs. USNG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FCG (First Trust Natural Gas ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. FCG is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, FCG returned 16.99% vs 47.43% for USNG. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.

Performance

FCG vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCG achieves a 17.54% return, which is significantly lower than USNG's 36.17% return.

FCG

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: -9.72%
• YTD: 17.54%
• 6M: 17.54%
• 1Y: 16.99%
• 3Y*: 10.20%
• 5Y*: 13.77%
• 10Y*: 3.91%

USNG

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -0.64%
• YTD: 36.17%
• 6M: 36.35%
• 1Y: 47.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FCG vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF	17.54%	5.33%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	36.17%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between FCG and USNG is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025	0.41

FCG vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FCG	USNG
Energy	99.0%	79.2%
Technology	1.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	1.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	12.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	4.7%

Return for Risk

FCG vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCG

FCG Risk / Return Rank: 20
FCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FCG Omega Ratio Rank: 18
FCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FCG Martin Ratio Rank: 23

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 91
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 86
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

FCG vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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.

	FCG	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.63	2.86	-2.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.99	3.85	-2.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.48	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.95	6.99	-6.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.77	21.05	-18.28

FCG vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCG Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is lower than the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCG and USNG, 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

FCG vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -6.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCG	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.20%	-6.82%	-90.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.90%	-6.82%	-11.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.44%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-85.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-76.30%	-0.64%	-75.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-65.39%	-1.52%	-63.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.16%	2.26%	+3.90%

Volatility

FCG vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) has a higher volatility of 9.31% compared to Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) at 6.29%. This indicates that FCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCG	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.31%	6.29%	+3.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.32%	12.47%	+7.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.29%	16.68%	+10.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.43%	16.61%	+16.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.29%	16.61%	+21.68%

FCG vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCG vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, more than USNG's 1.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF	2.33%	2.86%	2.76%	3.25%	3.04%	1.73%	3.82%	2.87%	1.46%	1.56%	1.70%	4.79%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.09%	1.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCG and USNG in my portfolio?

FCG and USNG have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCG or USNG?

FCG has higher volatility (9.31%) compared to USNG (6.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCG dropped -97.20% vs USNG's -6.82%.

Which ETF is better, FCG or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 47.43% vs 16.99% for FCG. On fees, USNG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, USNG has been the lower-risk option at 6.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCG or USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 47.43% return vs 16.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCG or USNG?

USNG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FCG or USNG?

FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.33%, compared with 1.09% for USNG.

What is the main difference between FCG and USNG?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FCG and 0.59% for USNG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 0.63), 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.