TPZ vs. USNG

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

TPZ (Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TPZ returned 3.96% vs 32.36% for USNG. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. TPZ charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.

Performance

TPZ vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF (TPZ) 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, TPZ achieves a 6.91% return, which is significantly lower than USNG's 26.87% return.

TPZ

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: -1.48%
• 6M: 3.90%
• YTD: 6.91%
• 1Y: 3.96%
• 3Y*: 22.25%
• 5Y*: 18.69%
• 10Y*: 8.30%
• ALL TIME*: 7.92%

USNG

• 1D: 0.79%
• 1M: -2.11%
• 6M: 12.98%
• YTD: 26.87%
• 1Y: 32.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 32.30%

*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)
TPZ Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF	$293.05K	$219.78K	$220.84K
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	$387.47K	$271.98K	$161.10K

TPZ vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TPZ Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF	6.91%	4.41%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	26.87%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between TPZ and USNG is 0.65, 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.	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025	0.65

The correlation between TPZ and USNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

TPZ vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TPZ	USNG
Energy	51.8%	80.9%
Utilities	43.6%	5.2%
Industrials	4.6%	7.7%
Basic Materials	-	1.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	4.7%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

TPZ vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

TPZ

TPZ Risk / Return Rank: 17
TPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
TPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
TPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 14
TPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
TPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 19

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 70
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 66
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

TPZ vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF (TPZ) 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.

	TPZ	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.28	1.86	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.49	2.60	-2.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.32	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.60	2.72	-2.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.38	10.86	-9.47

TPZ vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TPZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.28, which is lower than the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TPZ 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

TPZ vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TPZ drawdown since its inception was -78.17%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -11.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TPZ and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	TPZ	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.17%	-11.93%	-66.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.63%	-11.93%	+5.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.78%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.78%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-77.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.57%	-7.43%	+1.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.85%	-1.89%	-9.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.99%	3.01%	-0.02%

Volatility

TPZ vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF (TPZ) is 4.75%, while Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a volatility of 6.45%. This indicates that TPZ 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.

Volatility by Period

	TPZ	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.75%	6.45%	-1.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.20%	13.82%	-2.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.15%	17.46%	-3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.67%	17.25%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.73%	17.25%	+10.48%

TPZ vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

TPZ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

TPZ vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

TPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%, more than USNG's 1.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
TPZ Tortoise Electrification Infrastructure ETF	3.49%	3.99%	5.88%	8.99%	9.52%	4.77%	8.80%	8.84%	9.41%	7.28%	6.88%	9.68%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.52%	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

Can I hold both TPZ and USNG in my portfolio?

TPZ and USNG have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TPZ or USNG?

USNG has higher volatility (6.45%) compared to TPZ (4.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TPZ dropped -78.17% vs USNG's -11.93%.

Which ETF is better, TPZ or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 32.36% vs 3.96% for TPZ. On fees, USNG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, TPZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TPZ or USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 32.36% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TPZ or USNG?

USNG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TPZ.

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

TPZ has the higher dividend yield at 3.49%, compared with 1.52% for USNG.

What is the main difference between TPZ and USNG?

They also come from different issuers: Tortoise and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TPZ and 0.59% for USNG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 0.28), 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.