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

Performance

FJUN vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN) 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, FJUN achieves a 4.73% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 70.69% return.


FJUN

1D
0.09%
1M
0.87%
YTD
4.73%
6M
5.29%
1Y
13.94%
3Y*
14.49%
5Y*
11.07%
10Y*

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)

FJUN vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FJUN
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June
4.73%11.05%16.38%22.30%-4.95%11.47%11.67%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
70.69%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%19.69%

Correlation

The correlation between FJUN and UGA is -0.28, 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

-0.28

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

-0.06

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

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2020

0.11

The correlation between FJUN and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.11 (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

FJUN vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FJUN
FJUN Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
FJUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FJUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FJUN Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
FJUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
FJUN Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

FJUN vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN) 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.


FJUNUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.37

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.39

5.37

-1.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.19

12.86

+6.33

FJUN vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FJUN Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FJUN 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


FJUNUGADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.30

2.27

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.05

0.71

+0.34

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.38

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.17

0.12

+1.05

Drawdowns

FJUN vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FJUN drawdown since its inception was -13.26%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FJUN and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FJUNUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.26%

-86.59%

+73.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.13%

-14.88%

+10.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.26%

-26.68%

+13.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.26%

-38.11%

+24.85%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

-14.75%

+14.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.67%

-36.76%

+35.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.73%

6.20%

-5.47%

Volatility

FJUN vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN) is 0.35%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 11.64%. This indicates that FJUN 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


FJUNUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.35%

11.64%

-11.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.35%

30.48%

-26.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.08%

35.27%

-29.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.55%

34.40%

-23.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.26%

37.27%

-27.01%

FJUN vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FJUN has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

FJUN vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither FJUN nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FJUN and UGA have a correlation of -0.28, 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 FJUN (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FJUN dropped -13.26% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 24.41% vs 11.07% for FJUN. On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, FJUN has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, UGA has performed better with a 24.41% return vs 11.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJUN.

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

FJUN is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. FJUN tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index June, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FJUN and 0.75% for UGA.

FJUN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.27), 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 FJUN 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