GSGO vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

GSGO (Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GSGO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. GSGO charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

GSGO vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF (GSGO) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSGO achieves a 8.99% return, which is significantly lower than UMI's 21.76% return.

GSGO

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: -0.07%
• YTD: 8.99%
• 6M: 8.32%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UMI

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: -5.27%
• YTD: 21.76%
• 6M: 23.01%
• 1Y: 24.46%
• 3Y*: 27.84%
• 5Y*: 20.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

GSGO vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GSGO Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF	8.99%	0.81%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	21.76%	0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between GSGO and UMI is -0.19, 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 Nov 17, 2025	-0.19

Return for Risk

GSGO vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSGO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 54
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 48
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

GSGO vs. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF (GSGO) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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.

	GSGO	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.73	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.40	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.30	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.28	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	8.47	—

Drawdowns

GSGO vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSGO drawdown since its inception was -13.88%, smaller than the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSGO and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSGO	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.88%	-48.08%	+34.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.50%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.05%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.79%	-5.35%	+1.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.00%	-6.59%	+3.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.90%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GSGO	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.33%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.05%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.84%	14.23%	+4.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.84%	19.45%	-0.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.84%	23.16%	-4.32%

GSGO vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSGO has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSGO vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

GSGO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.02%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GSGO Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	6.02%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSGO and UMI in my portfolio?

GSGO and UMI have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GSGO or UMI?

On fees, GSGO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GSGO or UMI?

GSGO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GSGO or UMI?

UMI has the higher dividend yield at 6.02%, compared with 0.00% for GSGO.

What is the main difference between GSGO and UMI?

GSGO is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GSGO and 0.85% for UMI.