FEBT vs. UGA

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - FEBT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. FEBT is actively managed, while UGA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBT returned 15.43%/yr vs 19.22%/yr for UGA. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. FEBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for UGA.

Performance

FEBT vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) 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, FEBT achieves a 6.74% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 66.14% return.

FEBT

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: -0.39%
• YTD: 6.74%
• 6M: 6.20%
• 1Y: 17.25%
• 3Y*: 15.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UGA

• 1D: 4.14%
• 1M: -5.40%
• YTD: 66.14%
• 6M: 62.36%
• 1Y: 70.24%
• 3Y*: 19.22%
• 5Y*: 23.21%
• 10Y*: 14.74%

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

FEBT vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	6.74%	12.72%	17.29%	15.47%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	66.14%	-2.00%	3.77%	-1.83%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and UGA is -0.21, 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	-0.21
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2023	-0.00

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between FEBT and UGA has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.00 to -0.21, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 78
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 69
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 64
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

FEBT vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) 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.

	FEBT	UGA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	2.03	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.19	2.55	+0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.34	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	3.47	-0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.29	10.69	+3.60

FEBT vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT 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

FEBT vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and UGA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	UGA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-86.59%	+73.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	-20.32%	+14.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	-26.68%	+13.49%
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	-1.41%	-17.02%	+15.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.17%	-36.69%	+35.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.21%	6.59%	-5.38%

Volatility

FEBT vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) is 2.39%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 8.84%. This indicates that FEBT 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

	FEBT	UGA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.39%	8.84%	-6.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.27%	30.92%	-24.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.82%	34.74%	-26.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.75%	34.52%	-24.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.75%	37.24%	-27.49%

FEBT vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBT vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBT and UGA in my portfolio?

FEBT and UGA have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEBT or UGA?

UGA has higher volatility (8.84%) compared to FEBT (2.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs UGA's -86.59%.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or UGA?

On 3-year performance, UGA leads with 19.22% vs 15.43% for FEBT. On fees, FEBT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FEBT has been the lower-risk option at 2.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBT or UGA?

Over the 3-year period, UGA has performed better with a 19.22% return vs 15.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or UGA?

FEBT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

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

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

What is the main difference between FEBT and UGA?

FEBT is categorized as Options Trading, while UGA is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBT and 0.75% for UGA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 2.03), 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.