PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UNG vs. UGA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UNG vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UNG achieves a -1.14% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 70.69% return. Over the past 10 years, UNG has underperformed UGA with an annualized return of -20.42%, while UGA has yielded a comparatively higher 14.27% annualized return.


UNG

1D
3.50%
1M
13.91%
YTD
-1.14%
6M
-22.61%
1Y
-28.33%
3Y*
-21.15%
5Y*
-22.57%
10Y*
-20.42%

UGA

1D
-2.73%
1M
-12.25%
YTD
70.69%
6M
59.72%
1Y
79.48%
3Y*
20.80%
5Y*
24.41%
10Y*
14.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UNG vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UNG
United States Natural Gas Fund LP
-1.14%-27.07%-17.11%-64.04%12.89%35.76%-45.43%-31.77%5.96%-37.58%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
70.69%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%41.25%-28.07%1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between UNG and UGA is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.21

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.09

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 29, 2008

0.13

The correlation between UNG and UGA shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (3 years) to 0.21 (1 year), 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. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

UNG
UNG Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
UNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
UNG Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
UNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
UNG Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

UNG vs. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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.


UNGUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.96

1.37

-0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.65

5.37

-6.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.95

12.86

-13.81

UNG vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UNG Sharpe Ratio is -0.47, which is lower than the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UNG and UGA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


UNGUGADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.47

2.27

-2.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.35

0.71

-1.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.37

0.38

-0.76

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.57

0.12

-0.68

Drawdowns

UNG vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UNG drawdown since its inception was -99.88%, which is greater than UGA's maximum drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNG and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UNGUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.88%

-86.59%

-13.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-43.86%

-14.88%

-28.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-68.16%

-26.68%

-41.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-92.49%

-38.11%

-54.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-93.55%

-75.89%

-17.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.85%

-14.75%

-85.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-89.96%

-36.76%

-53.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

29.75%

6.20%

+23.55%

Volatility

UNG vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) has a higher volatility of 12.99% compared to United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) at 11.64%. This indicates that UNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UNGUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.99%

11.64%

+1.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

53.06%

30.48%

+22.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

60.59%

35.27%

+25.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

64.11%

34.40%

+29.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

54.78%

37.27%

+17.51%

UNG vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

UNG has a 1.28% expense ratio, which is higher than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

UNG vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

Neither UNG nor UGA has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


UNG and UGA have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UNG has higher volatility (12.99%) compared to UGA (11.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNG dropped -99.88% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 14.27% vs -20.42% for UNG. On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, UGA has been the lower-risk option at 11.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UGA has performed better with a 14.27% return vs -20.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.28% for UNG.

UNG and UGA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

UNG tracks Front Month Natural Gas, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. Their fees differ too: 1.28% for UNG and 0.75% for UGA.

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs -0.47), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UNG and UGA

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