UNG vs. GSSC
UNG (United States Natural Gas Fund LP) and GSSC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Small Cap Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UNG is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Natural Gas Futures, while GSSC is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UNG returned -24.87%/yr vs 7.65%/yr for GSSC. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UNG charges 1.17%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for GSSC.
Performance
UNG vs. GSSC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UNG achieves a -6.20% return, which is significantly lower than GSSC's 17.97% return.
UNG
- 1D
- -2.29%
- 1M
- 5.12%
- YTD
- -6.20%
- 6M
- -10.85%
- 1Y
- -31.71%
- 3Y*
- -27.52%
- 5Y*
- -24.87%
- 10Y*
- -21.37%
GSSC
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 5.36%
- YTD
- 17.97%
- 6M
- 15.68%
- 1Y
- 33.98%
- 3Y*
- 18.41%
- 5Y*
- 7.65%
- 10Y*
- —
UNG vs. GSSC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | -6.20% | -27.07% | -17.11% | -64.04% | 12.89% | 35.76% | -45.43% | -31.77% | 5.96% | -15.38% |
GSSC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Small Cap Equity ETF | 17.97% | 10.76% | 11.14% | 17.27% | -16.81% | 24.13% | 16.02% | 23.14% | -9.24% | 8.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between UNG and GSSC is -0.28, 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 | -0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2017 | 0.04 |
The correlation between UNG and GSSC shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
UNG vs. GSSC — Risk / Return Rank
UNG
GSSC
UNG vs. GSSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Small Cap Equity ETF (GSSC). 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.
| UNG | GSSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.31 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.80 | 3.23 | -4.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.25 | 10.80 | -12.05 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UNG vs. GSSC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UNG drawdown since its inception was -99.88%, which is greater than GSSC's maximum drawdown of -41.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNG and GSSC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UNG | GSSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.88% | -41.38% | -58.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -39.94% | -10.56% | -29.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -68.16% | -26.05% | -42.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -92.49% | -27.81% | -64.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -93.55% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.86% | -0.39% | -99.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -89.97% | -8.97% | -81.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 26.12% | 3.15% | +22.97% |
Volatility
UNG vs. GSSC - Volatility Comparison
United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) has a higher volatility of 12.10% compared to Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Small Cap Equity ETF (GSSC) at 5.60%. This indicates that UNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UNG | GSSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.10% | 5.60% | +6.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 50.87% | 13.34% | +37.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 60.39% | 18.88% | +41.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 64.14% | 21.30% | +42.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 23.00% | +31.80% |
UNG vs. GSSC - Expense Ratio Comparison
UNG has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than GSSC's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
UNG vs. GSSC - Dividend Comparison
UNG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSSC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Small Cap Equity ETF | 1.03% | 1.17% | 1.42% | 1.33% | 1.31% | 1.00% | 0.94% | 1.24% | 1.21% | 0.73% |
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UNG and GSSC have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UNG has higher volatility (12.10%) compared to GSSC (5.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNG dropped -99.88% vs GSSC's -41.38%.
On 5-year performance, GSSC leads with 7.65% vs -24.87% for UNG. On fees, GSSC is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, GSSC has been the lower-risk option at 5.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GSSC has performed better with a 7.65% return vs -24.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSSC is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for UNG.
GSSC has the higher dividend yield at 1.03%, compared with 0.00% for UNG.
UNG is categorized as Oil & Gas, while GSSC is Small Cap Growth Equities. UNG tracks Front Month Natural Gas Futures, while GSSC tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: USCF Investments and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 1.17% for UNG and 0.20% for GSSC.
GSSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs -0.53), 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 UNG and GSSC
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