POWR vs. USNG
POWR (iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. POWR is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, POWR returned 16.38% vs 32.07% for USNG. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. POWR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.
Performance
POWR vs. USNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, POWR achieves a 12.12% return, which is significantly lower than USNG's 25.43% return.
POWR
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -3.78%
- 6M
- 6.76%
- YTD
- 12.12%
- 1Y
- 16.38%
- 3Y*
- 7.49%
- 5Y*
- 15.95%
- 10Y*
- 8.36%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.05%
USNG
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- -3.22%
- 6M
- 12.87%
- YTD
- 25.43%
- 1Y
- 32.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 31.38%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $5.98M | $6.98M | $7.47M | |
| $437.77K | $274.58K | $158.86K |
POWR vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF | 12.12% | 8.98% |
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 25.43% | 10.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between POWR and USNG is 0.58, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025 | 0.54 |
The correlation between POWR and USNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.
POWR vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
POWR
USNG
Utilities
Industrials
Energy
Technology
-
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
POWR
USNG
Industrials
POWR
USNG
Energy
POWR
USNG
Technology
POWR
USNG
-
Basic Materials
POWR
USNG
Communication Services
POWR
-
USNG
-
Consumer Cyclical
POWR
-
USNG
-
Consumer Defensive
POWR
-
USNG
-
Financial Services
POWR
-
USNG
Healthcare
POWR
-
USNG
-
Real Estate
POWR
-
USNG
-
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
POWR vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank
POWR
USNG
POWR vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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.
| POWR | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.30 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.54 | 2.62 | -1.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.38 | 10.67 | -5.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
POWR vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum POWR drawdown since its inception was -65.98%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -11.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for POWR and USNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| POWR | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.98% | -11.93% | -54.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.77% | -11.93% | +2.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.14% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.09% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -63.42% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.78% | -8.47% | +1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.99% | -1.85% | -16.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.79% | 2.93% | -0.14% |
Volatility
POWR vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR) is 5.12%, while Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a volatility of 6.49%. This indicates that POWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| POWR | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.12% | 6.49% | -1.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.54% | 13.82% | -0.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.26% | 17.46% | -0.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.93% | 17.29% | +5.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.50% | 17.29% | +8.21% |
POWR vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
POWR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
POWR vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison
POWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.75%, more than USNG's 1.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF | 5.75% | 7.56% | 4.36% | 4.16% | 4.82% | 3.94% | 3.96% | 5.71% | 3.17% | 3.11% | 2.75% | 3.42% |
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 1.54% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
POWR and USNG have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
USNG has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to POWR (5.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, POWR dropped -65.98% vs USNG's -11.93%.
On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 32.07% vs 16.38% for POWR. On fees, POWR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, POWR has been the lower-risk option at 5.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 32.07% return vs 16.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
POWR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for USNG.
POWR has the higher dividend yield at 5.75%, compared with 1.54% for USNG.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for POWR and 0.59% for USNG.
USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.87), 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 POWR and USNG
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