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

Performance

USNG vs. QDVO - 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 Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF (QDVO). 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 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*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

USNG vs. QDVO - Yearly Performance Comparison


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

78.0%
0.8%

Industrials

13.8%
1.7%

Utilities

5.0%
0.7%

Financial Services

1.8%
4.1%

Basic Materials

1.4%
1.8%

Communication Services

-

16.8%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.3%

Healthcare

-

4.6%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

50.6%

Energy

USNG
78.0%
QDVO
0.8%

Industrials

USNG
13.8%
QDVO
1.7%

Utilities

USNG
5.0%
QDVO
0.7%

Financial Services

USNG
1.8%
QDVO
4.1%

Basic Materials

USNG
1.4%
QDVO
1.8%

Communication Services

USNG

-

QDVO
16.8%

Consumer Cyclical

USNG

-

QDVO
12.5%

Consumer Defensive

USNG

-

QDVO
6.3%

Healthcare

USNG

-

QDVO
4.6%

Real Estate

USNG

-

QDVO

-

Technology

USNG

-

QDVO
50.6%

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

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

QDVO
QDVO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
QDVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDVO Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
QDVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDVO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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. 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.


USNGQDVODifference
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

USNG vs. QDVO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USNG Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the QDVO Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USNG and QDVO, 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


USNGQDVODifference

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


USNGQDVODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.10%

-0.94%

-3.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.40%

-2.37%

+0.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


USNGQDVODifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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