RCTR vs. USNG

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RCTR (First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RCTR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Bloomberg Nuclear Power Index, while USNG is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by Amplify. RCTR is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, RCTR returned 9.71% vs 32.07% for USNG. Their 0.49 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RCTR charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.

Performance

RCTR vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RCTR achieves a 0.61% return, which is significantly lower than USNG's 25.43% return.

RCTR

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• 6M: -9.50%
• YTD: 0.61%
• 1Y: 9.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.30%

USNG

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: -3.22%
• 6M: 12.87%
• YTD: 25.43%
• 1Y: 32.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 31.38%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	$83.08K	$122.59K	$254.75K
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	$437.77K	$274.58K	$158.86K

RCTR vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	0.61%	6.65%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	25.43%	4.96%

Correlation

The correlation between RCTR and USNG is 0.49, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025	0.49

Return for Risk

RCTR vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RCTR

RCTR Risk / Return Rank: 18
RCTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
RCTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
RCTR Omega Ratio Rank: 17
RCTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
RCTR Martin Ratio Rank: 18

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 76
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 72
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RCTR vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) 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.

	RCTR	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	1.79	-1.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.60	2.51	-1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.30	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.42	2.62	-2.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.00	10.67	-9.66

RCTR vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RCTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RCTR and USNG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RCTR vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RCTR drawdown since its inception was -18.98%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -11.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RCTR and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	RCTR	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.98%	-11.93%	-7.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.98%	-11.93%	-7.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.26%	-8.47%	-7.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.09%	-1.85%	-4.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.86%	2.93%	+4.93%

Volatility

RCTR vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) has a higher volatility of 7.98% compared to Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) at 6.49%. This indicates that RCTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RCTR	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.98%	6.49%	+1.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.49%	13.82%	+6.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.82%	17.46%	+9.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.82%	17.29%	+9.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.82%	17.29%	+9.53%

RCTR vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RCTR has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

RCTR vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

RCTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than USNG's 1.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	0.64%	0.36%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.54%	1.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RCTR and USNG in my portfolio?

RCTR and USNG have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RCTR or USNG?

RCTR has higher volatility (7.98%) compared to USNG (6.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RCTR dropped -18.98% vs USNG's -11.93%.

Which ETF is better, RCTR or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 32.07% vs 9.71% for RCTR. On fees, USNG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, USNG has been the lower-risk option at 6.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RCTR or USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 32.07% return vs 9.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RCTR or USNG?

USNG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for RCTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RCTR or USNG?

USNG has the higher dividend yield at 1.54%, compared with 0.64% for RCTR.

What is the main difference between RCTR and USNG?

RCTR is categorized as Energy Equities, while USNG is Infrastructure Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for RCTR and 0.59% for USNG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.29), 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.