USE vs. UNG
USE (USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund) and UNG (United States Natural Gas Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - USE is a Commodities fund actively managed by USCF, while UNG is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Natural Gas Futures. USE is actively managed, while UNG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, USE returned 9.33%/yr vs -28.62%/yr for UNG. Their -0.12 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. USE charges 0.79%/yr vs 1.17%/yr for UNG.
Performance
USE vs. UNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, USE achieves a 36.22% return, which is significantly higher than UNG's -17.54% return.
USE
- 1D
- -3.71%
- 1M
- 21.36%
- 6M
- 44.67%
- YTD
- 36.22%
- 1Y
- 11.10%
- 3Y*
- 9.33%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.60%
UNG
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- -12.69%
- 6M
- -20.39%
- YTD
- -17.54%
- 1Y
- -25.77%
- 3Y*
- -28.62%
- 5Y*
- -29.56%
- 10Y*
- -22.65%
- ALL TIME*
- -28.45%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $81.89M | $81.97M | $83.57M | |
| $689.79K | $334.22K | $152.34K |
USE vs. UNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
USE USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund | 36.22% | -14.97% | 22.58% | 9.68% |
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | -17.54% | -27.07% | -17.11% | -19.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between USE and UNG is -0.04, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2023 | -0.12 |
The correlation between USE and UNG shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (3 years) to -0.04 (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
USE vs. UNG — Risk / Return Rank
USE
UNG
USE vs. UNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) and United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG). 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.
| USE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 0.96 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.40 | -0.62 | +1.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.74 | -1.02 | +1.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
USE vs. UNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum USE drawdown since its inception was -28.17%, smaller than the maximum UNG drawdown of -99.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USE and UNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| USE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.17% | -99.88% | +71.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -28.17% | -42.01% | +13.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.17% | -69.26% | +41.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -92.75% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -93.77% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.46% | -99.88% | +87.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.40% | -90.03% | +81.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.94% | 25.26% | -10.32% |
Volatility
USE vs. UNG - Volatility Comparison
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) has a higher volatility of 15.88% compared to United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) at 10.03%. This indicates that USE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| USE | UNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.88% | 10.03% | +5.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 31.16% | 40.36% | -9.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 35.00% | 59.10% | -24.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.60% | 64.16% | -35.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.60% | 54.70% | -26.10% |
USE vs. UNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
USE has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than UNG's 1.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
USE vs. UNG - Dividend Comparison
USE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, while UNG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
UNG United States Natural Gas Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
USE USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund | 2.25% | 3.06% | 38.65% | 4.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
USE and UNG have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
USE has higher volatility (15.88%) compared to UNG (10.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USE dropped -28.17% vs UNG's -99.88%.
On 3-year performance, USE leads with 9.33% vs -28.62% for UNG. On fees, USE is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, UNG has been the lower-risk option at 10.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, USE has performed better with a 9.33% return vs -28.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
USE is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for UNG.
USE has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 0.00% for UNG.
USE is categorized as Commodities, while UNG is Oil & Gas. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for USE and 1.17% for UNG.
USE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.32 vs -0.44), 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 USE and UNG
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