UMI vs. MGK
UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) and MGK (Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc., while MGK is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Mega Cap Growth Index. UMI is actively managed, while MGK is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UMI returned 19.88%/yr vs 14.87%/yr for MGK. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UMI charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for MGK.
Performance
UMI vs. MGK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMI achieves a 24.00% return, which is significantly higher than MGK's 5.33% return.
UMI
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -1.25%
- YTD
- 24.00%
- 6M
- 23.82%
- 1Y
- 25.24%
- 3Y*
- 27.76%
- 5Y*
- 19.88%
- 10Y*
- —
MGK
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -3.17%
- YTD
- 5.33%
- 6M
- 6.21%
- 1Y
- 24.77%
- 3Y*
- 24.17%
- 5Y*
- 14.87%
- 10Y*
- 18.85%
UMI vs. MGK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 24.00% | 5.11% | 42.97% | 14.60% | 20.78% | 20.97% | -8.25% | 21.06% | -10.64% | 2.76% |
MGK Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF | 5.33% | 20.67% | 32.94% | 51.67% | -33.59% | 28.58% | 41.01% | 37.38% | -2.91% | 2.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMI and MGK is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2017 | 0.30 |
The correlation between UMI and MGK shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.30 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
UMI vs. MGK - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UMI
MGK
Energy
-
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Energy
UMI
MGK
-
Utilities
UMI
MGK
Basic Materials
UMI
-
MGK
Communication Services
UMI
-
MGK
Consumer Cyclical
UMI
-
MGK
Consumer Defensive
UMI
-
MGK
Financial Services
UMI
-
MGK
Healthcare
UMI
-
MGK
Industrials
UMI
-
MGK
Real Estate
UMI
-
MGK
Technology
UMI
-
MGK
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
UMI vs. MGK — Risk / Return Rank
UMI
MGK
UMI vs. MGK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) and Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF (MGK). 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.
| UMI | MGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.24 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.43 | 1.37 | +2.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.22 | 4.65 | +4.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UMI vs. MGK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMI drawdown since its inception was -48.08%, roughly equal to the maximum MGK drawdown of -48.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMI and MGK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMI | MGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.08% | -48.43% | +0.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.50% | -16.85% | +9.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.08% | -23.36% | +6.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.05% | -36.01% | +15.96% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.01% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.61% | -5.63% | +2.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -7.58% | +0.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.79% | 4.97% | -2.18% |
Volatility
UMI vs. MGK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) is 5.61%, while Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF (MGK) has a volatility of 5.96%. This indicates that UMI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MGK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UMI | MGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 5.96% | -0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.01% | 13.29% | -2.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.09% | 16.87% | -2.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.54% | 22.72% | -3.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.17% | 21.93% | +1.24% |
UMI vs. MGK - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMI has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than MGK's 0.05% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMI vs. MGK - Dividend Comparison
UMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, more than MGK's 0.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MGK Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF | 0.33% | 0.35% | 0.43% | 0.50% | 0.70% | 0.41% | 0.65% | 0.85% | 1.12% | 1.23% | 1.53% | 1.43% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 5.91% | 6.23% | 4.39% | 4.67% | 4.36% | 3.00% | 2.18% | 2.47% | 2.48% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMI and MGK have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MGK has higher volatility (5.96%) compared to UMI (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMI dropped -48.08% vs MGK's -48.43%.
On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 19.88% vs 14.87% for MGK. On fees, MGK is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, UMI has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 19.88% return vs 14.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MGK is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.
UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.91%, compared with 0.33% for MGK.
UMI is categorized as Energy Equities, while MGK is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Wainwright, Inc. and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for UMI and 0.05% for MGK.
UMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.37), 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 UMI and MGK
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