GPRF vs. LNGX
GPRF (Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF) and LNGX (Global X U.S. Natural Gas ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GPRF is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs US Preferred Stock and Hybrids Index, while LNGX is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Global X U.S. Natural Gas Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.32, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.45% expense ratio.
Performance
GPRF vs. LNGX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GPRF achieves a 1.33% return, which is significantly lower than LNGX's 20.47% return.
GPRF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 6.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LNGX
- 1D
- 0.76%
- 1M
- -6.84%
- YTD
- 20.47%
- 6M
- 13.78%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GPRF vs. LNGX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 1.33% | -0.40% |
LNGX Global X U.S. Natural Gas ETF | 20.47% | 5.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between GPRF and LNGX is -0.32, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2025 | -0.32 |
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
GPRF vs. LNGX — Risk / Return Rank
GPRF
LNGX
GPRF vs. LNGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF (GPRF) and Global X U.S. Natural Gas ETF (LNGX). 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.
| GPRF | LNGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.76 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.50 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.51 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GPRF | LNGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.76 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.37 | 2.10 | -0.72 |
Drawdowns
GPRF vs. LNGX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GPRF drawdown since its inception was -4.36%, smaller than the maximum LNGX drawdown of -14.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPRF and LNGX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GPRF | LNGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.36% | -14.31% | +9.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | -11.36% | +10.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.89% | -4.37% | +3.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.88% | — | — |
Volatility
GPRF vs. LNGX - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GPRF | LNGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.78% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.76% | 24.67% | -20.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 24.67% | -20.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.94% | 24.67% | -20.73% |
GPRF vs. LNGX - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GPRF and LNGX have an expense ratio of 0.45%.
Dividends
GPRF vs. LNGX - Dividend Comparison
GPRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.65%, more than LNGX's 0.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GPRF Goldman Sachs Access U.S. Preferred Stock and Hybrid Securities ETF | 5.65% | 5.38% | 2.10% |
LNGX Global X U.S. Natural Gas ETF | 0.22% | 0.27% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GPRF and LNGX have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.45% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GPRF and LNGX have the same expense ratio: 0.45% per year.
GPRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.65%, compared with 0.22% for LNGX.
GPRF is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while LNGX is Energy Equities. GPRF tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs US Preferred Stock and Hybrids Index, while LNGX tracks Global X U.S. Natural Gas Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Global X.
Find the right allocation for GPRF and LNGX
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