GSJY vs. UGA
GSJY (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF) and UGA (United States Gasoline Fund, LP) are both exchange-traded funds - GSJY is a Japan Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity Index, while UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Near-Month NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GSJY returned 9.05%/yr vs 16.82%/yr for UGA. Their 0.14 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GSJY charges 0.25%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for UGA.
Performance
GSJY vs. UGA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSJY achieves a 14.32% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 80.98% return. Over the past 10 years, GSJY has underperformed UGA with an annualized return of 9.05%, while UGA has yielded a comparatively higher 16.82% annualized return.
GSJY
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.76%
- 6M
- 7.61%
- YTD
- 14.32%
- 1Y
- 29.56%
- 3Y*
- 17.96%
- 5Y*
- 9.38%
- 10Y*
- 9.05%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.18%
UGA
- 1D
- -5.27%
- 1M
- 8.52%
- 6M
- 69.92%
- YTD
- 80.98%
- 1Y
- 78.20%
- 3Y*
- 16.66%
- 5Y*
- 25.31%
- 10Y*
- 16.82%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.51%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $176.08K | $192.71K | $274.31K | |
| $8.16M | $5.91M | $4.98M |
GSJY vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSJY Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF | 14.32% | 26.22% | 8.89% | 19.18% | -16.15% | 0.41% | 13.81% | 18.29% | -11.56% | 25.50% |
UGA United States Gasoline Fund, LP | 80.98% | -2.00% | 3.77% | 1.27% | 46.34% | 68.49% | -24.88% | 41.25% | -28.07% | 1.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSJY and UGA is -0.22, 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. | -0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.06 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2016 | 0.14 |
The correlation between GSJY and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.14 (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
GSJY vs. UGA — Risk / Return Rank
GSJY
UGA
GSJY vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF (GSJY) 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.
| GSJY | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.35 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.11 | 3.87 | -1.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.76 | 10.83 | -4.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GSJY vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSJY drawdown since its inception was -32.53%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSJY and UGA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSJY | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.53% | -86.59% | +54.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.08% | -20.32% | +6.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.96% | -26.68% | +11.72% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.53% | -38.11% | +5.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.53% | -75.89% | +43.36% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.46% | -10.61% | +8.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.52% | -36.53% | +29.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.39% | 7.25% | -2.86% |
Volatility
GSJY vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF (GSJY) is 6.92%, while United States Gasoline Fund, LP (UGA) has a volatility of 12.68%. This indicates that GSJY 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
| GSJY | UGA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.92% | 12.68% | -5.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.21% | 32.51% | -15.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.50% | 36.42% | -15.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.41% | 34.68% | -16.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.16% | 37.30% | -20.14% |
GSJY vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSJY has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 1.02% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSJY vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison
GSJY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.03%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSJY Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity ETF | 2.03% | 1.99% | 1.64% | 2.11% | 2.13% | 1.73% | 1.22% | 2.79% | 3.28% | 1.70% | 2.09% |
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% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GSJY and UGA have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UGA has higher volatility (12.68%) compared to GSJY (6.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSJY dropped -32.53% vs UGA's -86.59%.
On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 16.82% vs 9.05% for GSJY. On fees, GSJY is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, GSJY has been the lower-risk option at 6.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, UGA has performed better with a 16.82% return vs 9.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSJY is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for UGA.
GSJY has the higher dividend yield at 2.03%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.
GSJY is categorized as Japan Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. GSJY tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Japan Equity Index, while UGA tracks Near-Month NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GSJY and 1.02% for UGA.
UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.45), 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.
Find the right allocation for GSJY 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