PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) and Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUC.TO achieves a 45.00% return, which is significantly higher than HUN.TO's -4.38% return. Over the past 10 years, HUC.TO has outperformed HUN.TO with an annualized return of 8.61%, while HUN.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 6.09% annualized return.


HUC.TO

1D
1.46%
1M
-1.28%
YTD
45.00%
6M
41.59%
1Y
40.27%
3Y*
12.31%
5Y*
13.32%
10Y*
8.61%

HUN.TO

1D
-0.13%
1M
-6.67%
YTD
-4.38%
6M
-11.35%
1Y
-16.44%
3Y*
-7.05%
5Y*
6.04%
10Y*
6.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF
45.00%-13.63%7.23%-2.89%26.25%57.81%-21.10%19.75%-11.68%-3.47%
HUN.TO
Global X Natural Gas ETF
-4.38%-5.60%10.19%-39.99%52.18%67.65%8.69%-11.59%50.53%-24.03%

Correlation

The correlation between HUC.TO and HUN.TO is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

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

0.13

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

0.13

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2009

0.09

The correlation between HUC.TO and HUN.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), 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

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUC.TO
HUC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

HUN.TO
HUN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
HUN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HUN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
HUN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
HUN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
HUN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) and Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO). 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.


HUC.TOHUN.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

0.93

+0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

-0.65

+3.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.94

-1.00

+5.94

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is higher than the HUN.TO Sharpe Ratio of -0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUC.TO and HUN.TO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


HUC.TOHUN.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.60

-0.54

+2.14

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.15

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.30

0.18

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

0.00

+0.13

Drawdowns

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUC.TO drawdown since its inception was -76.99%, smaller than the maximum HUN.TO drawdown of -85.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUC.TO and HUN.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HUC.TOHUN.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.99%

-85.33%

+8.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.20%

-25.56%

+9.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.83%

-38.11%

+14.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.83%

-68.00%

+37.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.56%

-68.00%

+6.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.80%

-66.12%

+63.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.61%

-64.23%

+29.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.17%

16.51%

-8.34%

Volatility

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a higher volatility of 11.26% compared to Global X Natural Gas ETF (HUN.TO) at 6.11%. This indicates that HUC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HUN.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HUC.TOHUN.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.26%

6.11%

+5.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.17%

23.03%

-1.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.36%

30.45%

-5.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.85%

41.16%

-13.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.04%

34.86%

-5.82%

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUC.TO has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is lower than HUN.TO's 1.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

HUC.TO vs. HUN.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither HUC.TO nor HUN.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
HUN.TO
Global X Natural Gas ETF
0.00%0.00%12.17%11.26%5.52%6.84%9.49%9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions


HUC.TO and HUN.TO have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HUC.TO is cheaper at 1.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HUC.TO is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.40% for HUN.TO.

HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while HUN.TO tracks Solactive Natural Gas Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for HUC.TO and 1.40% for HUN.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HUC.TO and HUN.TO

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