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

Performance

FLJH vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) 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, FLJH achieves a 20.52% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 59.54% return.


FLJH

1D
0.20%
1M
2.90%
YTD
20.52%
6M
21.03%
1Y
47.18%
3Y*
27.21%
5Y*
20.82%
10Y*

UGA

1D
-2.77%
1M
-14.54%
YTD
59.54%
6M
55.91%
1Y
62.68%
3Y*
17.85%
5Y*
22.22%
10Y*
13.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLJH vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLJH
Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF
20.52%25.26%25.89%36.02%-2.75%12.68%10.65%20.34%-14.66%1.26%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
59.54%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%41.25%-28.07%-1.21%

Correlation

The correlation between FLJH and UGA is -0.17, 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

-0.17

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

-0.03

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

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2017

0.13

The correlation between FLJH and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.13 (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

FLJH vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLJH
FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

FLJH vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) 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.


FLJHUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.31

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.39

3.10

+1.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.90

9.66

+7.24

FLJH vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLJH Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is higher than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLJH 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...

Drawdowns

FLJH vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLJH drawdown since its inception was -31.51%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLJH and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLJHUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.51%

-86.59%

+55.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.80%

-20.32%

+9.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.39%

-26.68%

+6.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

-38.11%

+17.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.81%

-20.32%

+16.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.29%

-36.69%

+31.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.80%

6.51%

-3.71%

Volatility

FLJH vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) is 7.13%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 9.45%. This indicates that FLJH 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


FLJHUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.13%

9.45%

-2.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.64%

30.74%

-16.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.98%

34.84%

-15.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.70%

34.47%

-15.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.88%

37.22%

-17.34%

FLJH vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLJH has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLJH vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

FLJH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLJH
Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF
1.85%3.90%5.06%25.59%26.67%1.29%0.00%0.00%5.92%0.10%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLJH and UGA have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (9.45%) compared to FLJH (7.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLJH dropped -31.51% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 22.22% vs 20.82% for FLJH. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLJH has been the lower-risk option at 7.13%. 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 22.22% return vs 20.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UGA.

FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.

FLJH is categorized as Japan Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLJH and 0.75% for UGA.

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 1.82), 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 FLJH 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