UMI vs. XLK
UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) and XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc., while XLK is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P Technology Select Sector Daily Capped 35/20 Index. UMI is actively managed, while XLK is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UMI returned 19.88%/yr vs 22.02%/yr for XLK. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UMI charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLK.
Performance
UMI vs. XLK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMI achieves a 24.00% return, which is significantly lower than XLK's 28.52% return.
UMI
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -1.25%
- YTD
- 24.00%
- 6M
- 23.82%
- 1Y
- 25.24%
- 3Y*
- 27.76%
- 5Y*
- 19.88%
- 10Y*
- —
XLK
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 2.95%
- YTD
- 28.52%
- 6M
- 28.96%
- 1Y
- 55.42%
- 3Y*
- 30.28%
- 5Y*
- 22.02%
- 10Y*
- 25.19%
UMI vs. XLK - 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% |
XLK State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF | 28.52% | 24.61% | 21.63% | 56.02% | -27.73% | 34.74% | 43.62% | 49.86% | -1.68% | 1.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMI and XLK is -0.11, 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 | -0.11 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
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 | 0.29 |
The correlation between UMI and XLK shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
UMI vs. XLK - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UMI
XLK
Energy
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Energy
UMI
XLK
Utilities
UMI
XLK
-
Basic Materials
UMI
-
XLK
-
Communication Services
UMI
-
XLK
-
Consumer Cyclical
UMI
-
XLK
-
Consumer Defensive
UMI
-
XLK
-
Financial Services
UMI
-
XLK
-
Healthcare
UMI
-
XLK
-
Industrials
UMI
-
XLK
Real Estate
UMI
-
XLK
-
Technology
UMI
-
XLK
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. XLK — Risk / Return Rank
UMI
XLK
UMI vs. XLK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) and State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK). 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 | XLK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.39 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.43 | 3.36 | +0.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.22 | 10.85 | -1.63 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UMI vs. XLK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMI drawdown since its inception was -48.08%, smaller than the maximum XLK drawdown of -82.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMI and XLK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMI | XLK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.08% | -82.05% | +33.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.50% | -15.92% | +8.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.08% | -25.66% | +8.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.05% | -33.56% | +13.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.61% | -6.77% | +3.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -34.93% | +28.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.79% | 4.92% | -2.13% |
Volatility
UMI vs. XLK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) is 5.61%, while State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK) has a volatility of 10.86%. This indicates that UMI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UMI | XLK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 10.86% | -5.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.01% | 18.92% | -7.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.09% | 22.55% | -8.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.54% | 25.18% | -5.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.17% | 24.64% | -1.47% |
UMI vs. XLK - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMI has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than XLK's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMI vs. XLK - Dividend Comparison
UMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, more than XLK's 0.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XLK State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF | 0.41% | 0.54% | 0.66% | 0.76% | 1.04% | 0.65% | 0.92% | 1.16% | 1.60% | 1.37% | 1.74% | 1.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMI and XLK have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XLK has higher volatility (10.86%) compared to UMI (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMI dropped -48.08% vs XLK's -82.05%.
On 5-year performance, XLK leads with 22.02% vs 19.88% for UMI. On fees, XLK is cheaper at 0.08% 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, XLK has performed better with a 22.02% return vs 19.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLK is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.
UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.91%, compared with 0.41% for XLK.
UMI is categorized as Energy Equities, while XLK is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Wainwright, Inc. and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for UMI and 0.08% for XLK.
XLK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 1.83), 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 XLK
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