PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UNL vs. FCG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UNL vs. FCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) and First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UNL achieves a -11.72% return, which is significantly lower than FCG's 17.24% return. Over the past 10 years, UNL has underperformed FCG with an annualized return of -4.37%, while FCG has yielded a comparatively higher 3.88% annualized return.


UNL

1D
-0.38%
1M
3.74%
YTD
-11.72%
6M
-9.35%
1Y
-31.64%
3Y*
-17.42%
5Y*
-6.97%
10Y*
-4.37%

FCG

1D
1.64%
1M
-9.95%
YTD
17.24%
6M
18.20%
1Y
12.39%
3Y*
10.11%
5Y*
14.16%
10Y*
3.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UNL vs. FCG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UNL
United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP
-11.72%-9.67%-4.78%-50.20%47.01%54.42%-9.54%-18.78%12.53%-21.47%
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
17.24%-2.28%4.16%2.55%47.24%98.49%-23.20%-15.76%-34.81%-11.38%

Correlation

The correlation between UNL and FCG is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.31

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

0.29

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

0.30

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

0.25

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2010

0.25

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

UNL vs. FCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

UNL
UNL Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
UNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
UNL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
UNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
UNL Martin Ratio Rank: 11
Martin Ratio Rank

FCG
FCG Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
FCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCG Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
FCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCG Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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.

UNL vs. FCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) and First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG). 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.


UNLFCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.85

1.09

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.97

0.70

-1.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.56

2.05

-3.60

UNL vs. FCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UNL Sharpe Ratio is -0.89, which is lower than the FCG Sharpe Ratio of 0.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UNL and FCG, 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...

Drawdowns

UNL vs. FCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UNL drawdown since its inception was -89.00%, smaller than the maximum FCG drawdown of -97.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UNL and FCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UNLFCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.00%

-97.20%

+8.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.65%

-17.90%

-14.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.16%

-29.44%

-18.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-78.12%

-33.33%

-44.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-78.12%

-85.04%

+6.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-88.46%

-76.36%

-12.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-73.38%

-65.39%

-7.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

22.72%

6.68%

+16.04%

Volatility

UNL vs. FCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for United States 12 Month Natural Gas Fund LP (UNL) is 7.13%, while First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) has a volatility of 9.37%. This indicates that UNL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UNLFCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.13%

9.37%

-2.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

30.59%

20.54%

+10.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.79%

27.35%

+8.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

41.76%

33.43%

+8.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.85%

38.32%

-4.47%

UNL vs. FCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

UNL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than FCG's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

UNL vs. FCG - Dividend Comparison

UNL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
2.34%2.86%2.76%3.25%3.04%1.73%3.82%2.87%1.46%1.56%1.70%4.79%
UNL
United States 12 Month 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%

Frequently Asked Questions


UNL and FCG have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCG has higher volatility (9.37%) compared to UNL (7.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UNL dropped -89.00% vs FCG's -97.20%.

On 10-year performance, FCG leads with 3.88% vs -4.37% for UNL. On fees, FCG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, UNL has been the lower-risk option at 7.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FCG has performed better with a 3.88% return vs -4.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FCG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for UNL.

FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.00% for UNL.

UNL is categorized as Oil & Gas, while FCG is Energy Equities. UNL tracks 12 Month Natural Gas, while FCG tracks ISE-Revere Natural Gas Index. They also come from different issuers: Concierge Technologies and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for UNL and 0.60% for FCG.

FCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.46 vs -0.89), 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 UNL and FCG

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