UNG vs. VTWG
UNG (United States Natural Gas Fund LP) and VTWG (Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UNG is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Natural Gas Futures, while VTWG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UNG returned -21.19%/yr vs 12.28%/yr for VTWG. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UNG charges 1.17%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VTWG.
Performance
UNG vs. VTWG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UNG achieves a -4.00% return, which is significantly lower than VTWG's 22.21% return. Over the past 10 years, UNG has underperformed VTWG with an annualized return of -21.19%, while VTWG has yielded a comparatively higher 12.28% annualized return.
UNG
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 7.59%
- YTD
- -4.00%
- 6M
- -0.68%
- 1Y
- -33.35%
- 3Y*
- -26.96%
- 5Y*
- -24.05%
- 10Y*
- -21.19%
VTWG
- 1D
- 1.11%
- 1M
- 5.90%
- YTD
- 22.21%
- 6M
- 17.98%
- 1Y
- 43.59%
- 3Y*
- 19.92%
- 5Y*
- 5.88%
- 10Y*
- 12.28%
UNG vs. VTWG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | -4.00% | -27.07% | -17.11% | -64.04% | 12.89% | 35.76% | -45.43% | -31.77% | 5.96% | -37.58% |
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF | 22.21% | 13.07% | 15.15% | 18.90% | -26.49% | 2.84% | 34.72% | 28.75% | -9.45% | 22.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between UNG and VTWG 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 | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2010 | 0.02 |
The correlation between UNG and VTWG shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.02 (10 years), 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. VTWG — Risk / Return Rank
UNG
VTWG
UNG vs. VTWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG). 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 | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.32 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.84 | 2.94 | -3.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.28 | 10.57 | -11.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UNG vs. VTWG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UNG drawdown since its inception was -99.88%, which is greater than VTWG's maximum drawdown of -42.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNG and VTWG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UNG | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.88% | -42.07% | -57.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -39.94% | -14.88% | -25.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -68.16% | -28.58% | -39.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -92.49% | -40.49% | -52.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -93.55% | -42.07% | -51.48% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.86% | 0.00% | -99.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -89.97% | -10.50% | -79.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 29.14% | 4.14% | +25.00% |
Volatility
UNG vs. VTWG - Volatility Comparison
United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) has a higher volatility of 11.95% compared to Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) at 7.67%. This indicates that UNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VTWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UNG | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.95% | 7.67% | +4.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 51.06% | 16.86% | +34.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 60.47% | 22.32% | +38.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 64.14% | 24.67% | +39.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.79% | 24.30% | +30.49% |
UNG vs. VTWG - Expense Ratio Comparison
UNG has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than VTWG's 0.06% expense ratio.
Dividends
UNG vs. VTWG - Dividend Comparison
UNG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VTWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF | 0.58% | 0.64% | 0.55% | 0.79% | 0.71% | 0.54% | 0.48% | 0.72% | 0.72% | 0.64% | 0.96% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UNG and VTWG 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 (11.95%) compared to VTWG (7.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNG dropped -99.88% vs VTWG's -42.07%.
On 10-year performance, VTWG leads with 12.28% vs -21.19% for UNG. On fees, VTWG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, VTWG has been the lower-risk option at 7.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VTWG has performed better with a 12.28% return vs -21.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VTWG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for UNG.
VTWG has the higher dividend yield at 0.58%, compared with 0.00% for UNG.
UNG is categorized as Oil & Gas, while VTWG is Small Cap Growth Equities. UNG tracks Front Month Natural Gas Futures, while VTWG tracks Russell 2000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: USCF Investments and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 1.17% for UNG and 0.06% for VTWG.
VTWG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs -0.55), 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 VTWG
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