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

Performance

FNGS vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) 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, FNGS achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 91.06% return.


FNGS

1D
1.63%
1M
0.59%
6M
12.42%
YTD
9.02%
1Y
15.45%
3Y*
28.64%
5Y*
18.98%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
30.45%

UGA

1D
-0.01%
1M
14.56%
6M
70.02%
YTD
91.06%
1Y
88.12%
3Y*
17.55%
5Y*
25.78%
10Y*
18.03%
ALL TIME*
4.82%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.57M$1.92M$2.40M
$6.47M$5.01M$4.85M

FNGS vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FNGS
MicroSectors FANG+ ETN
9.02%18.64%51.99%95.24%-40.32%16.96%101.99%10.10%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund, LP
91.06%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGS and UGA is -0.12, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.12

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.01

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019

0.11

The correlation between FNGS and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (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

FNGS vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FNGS
FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FNGS vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) 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.


FNGSUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.37

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.51

4.12

-3.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.37

11.57

-10.20

FNGS vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGS 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

FNGS vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNGSUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.98%

-86.59%

+37.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.93%

-20.32%

-2.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.77%

-26.68%

-0.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-48.98%

-38.11%

-10.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.74%

-5.63%

-2.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.80%

-36.53%

+25.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.61%

7.26%

+1.35%

Volatility

FNGS vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 5.87%, while United States Gasoline Fund, LP (UGA) has a volatility of 11.28%. This indicates that FNGS 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


FNGSUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.87%

11.28%

-5.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.36%

31.98%

-13.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.86%

36.11%

-13.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.29%

34.60%

-4.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.07%

37.26%

-6.19%

FNGS vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 1.02% expense ratio.


Dividends

FNGS vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGS nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FNGS and UGA have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (11.28%) compared to FNGS (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 5-year performance, UGA leads with 25.78% vs 18.98% for FNGS. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.87%. 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 25.78% return vs 18.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for UGA.

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

FNGS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while UGA tracks Near-Month NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract. They also come from different issuers: BMO and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 1.02% for UGA.

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 0.52), 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 FNGS 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