USNG vs. QDVO
USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) and QDVO (Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - USNG is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Amplify, while QDVO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, USNG returned 40.50% vs 27.43% for QDVO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. USNG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for QDVO.
Performance
USNG vs. QDVO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, USNG achieves a 31.42% return, which is significantly higher than QDVO's 9.80% return.
USNG
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -1.95%
- YTD
- 31.42%
- 6M
- 28.41%
- 1Y
- 40.50%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDVO
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 4.45%
- YTD
- 9.80%
- 6M
- 9.65%
- 1Y
- 27.43%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
USNG vs. QDVO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 31.42% | 10.81% |
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF | 9.80% | 18.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between USNG and QDVO is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2025 | 0.30 |
USNG vs. QDVO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
USNG
QDVO
Energy
Industrials
Utilities
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Energy
USNG
QDVO
Industrials
USNG
QDVO
Utilities
USNG
QDVO
Financial Services
USNG
QDVO
Basic Materials
USNG
QDVO
Communication Services
USNG
-
QDVO
Consumer Cyclical
USNG
-
QDVO
Consumer Defensive
USNG
-
QDVO
Healthcare
USNG
-
QDVO
Real Estate
USNG
-
QDVO
-
Technology
USNG
-
QDVO
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. QDVO — Risk / Return Rank
USNG
QDVO
USNG vs. QDVO - 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 Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO). 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.
| USNG | QDVO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.40 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.97 | 2.70 | +3.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.70 | 10.98 | +8.72 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| USNG | QDVO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | 2.26 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.66 | 1.41 | +1.25 |
Drawdowns
USNG vs. QDVO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum USNG drawdown since its inception was -6.82%, smaller than the maximum QDVO drawdown of -17.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USNG and QDVO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| USNG | QDVO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.82% | -17.75% | +10.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.82% | -10.21% | +3.39% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.10% | -0.94% | -3.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.40% | -2.37% | +0.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.07% | 2.51% | -0.44% |
Volatility
USNG vs. QDVO - Volatility Comparison
Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a higher volatility of 6.40% compared to Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO) at 2.89%. This indicates that USNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDVO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| USNG | QDVO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.40% | 2.89% | +3.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.56% | 8.87% | +3.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.52% | 12.22% | +4.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.55% | 17.44% | -0.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.55% | 17.44% | -0.89% |
USNG vs. QDVO - Expense Ratio Comparison
USNG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than QDVO's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
USNG vs. QDVO - Dividend Comparison
USNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than QDVO's 10.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
QDVO Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF | 10.12% | 9.92% | 2.79% |
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 1.13% | 1.10% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
USNG and QDVO have a correlation of 0.29, 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 QDVO (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USNG dropped -6.82% vs QDVO's -17.75%.
On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 40.50% vs 27.43% for QDVO. On fees, QDVO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, QDVO has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. 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 27.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QDVO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for USNG.
QDVO has the higher dividend yield at 10.12%, compared with 1.13% for USNG.
USNG is categorized as Energy Equities, while QDVO is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for USNG and 0.56% for QDVO.
USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.26), 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 USNG and QDVO
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