PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
USNG vs. BSMV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

USNG vs. BSMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) and Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USNG achieves a 31.42% return, which is significantly higher than BSMV's 0.68% return.


USNG

1D
-0.19%
1M
-1.95%
YTD
31.42%
6M
28.41%
1Y
40.50%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BSMV

1D
0.04%
1M
0.40%
YTD
0.68%
6M
0.96%
1Y
5.82%
3Y*
3.08%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

USNG vs. BSMV - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between USNG and BSMV is -0.15, 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

-0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2025

-0.13

USNG vs. BSMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
USNG
BSMV

Energy

78.0%

-

Industrials

13.8%

-

Utilities

5.0%

-

Financial Services

1.8%
3.5%

Basic Materials

1.4%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

0.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Energy

USNG
78.0%
BSMV

-

Industrials

USNG
13.8%
BSMV

-

Utilities

USNG
5.0%
BSMV

-

Financial Services

USNG
1.8%
BSMV
3.5%

Basic Materials

USNG
1.4%
BSMV

-

Communication Services

USNG

-

BSMV

-

Consumer Cyclical

USNG

-

BSMV
0.0%

Consumer Defensive

USNG

-

BSMV

-

Healthcare

USNG

-

BSMV

-

Real Estate

USNG

-

BSMV

-

Technology

USNG

-

BSMV

-

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

USNG vs. BSMV — Risk / Return Rank

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

USNG
USNG Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

BSMV
BSMV Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
BSMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BSMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
BSMV Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
BSMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
BSMV Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

USNG vs. BSMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) and Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV). 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.


USNGBSMVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.48

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.97

2.09

+3.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.70

6.48

+13.21

USNG vs. BSMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USNG Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the BSMV Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USNG and BSMV, 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


USNGBSMVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.47

2.32

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.66

-0.19

+2.85

Drawdowns

USNG vs. BSMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USNG drawdown since its inception was -6.82%, smaller than the maximum BSMV drawdown of -20.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USNG and BSMV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


USNGBSMVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.82%

-20.68%

+13.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.82%

-2.79%

-4.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.10%

-5.43%

+1.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.40%

-10.44%

+9.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

0.90%

+1.17%

Volatility

USNG vs. BSMV - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a higher volatility of 6.40% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV) at 0.82%. This indicates that USNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


USNGBSMVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.40%

0.82%

+5.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.56%

1.79%

+10.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.52%

2.51%

+14.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.55%

5.69%

+10.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.55%

5.69%

+10.86%

USNG vs. BSMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

USNG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMV's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

USNG vs. BSMV - Dividend Comparison

USNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than BSMV's 2.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
BSMV
Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF
2.90%2.93%3.10%2.59%2.21%0.24%
USNG
Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF
1.13%1.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


USNG and BSMV have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

USNG has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to BSMV (0.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USNG dropped -6.82% vs BSMV's -20.68%.

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 40.50% vs 5.82% for BSMV. On fees, BSMV is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMV has been the lower-risk option at 0.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 40.50% return vs 5.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BSMV is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for USNG.

BSMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.90%, compared with 1.13% for USNG.

USNG is categorized as Energy Equities, while BSMV is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for USNG and 0.18% for BSMV.

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.32), 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 USNG and BSMV

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