USE vs USG: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund

USECNYSE Arca

USCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund

USGBNYSE Arca

Overlap

52.5%by weight

Expense ratio

USG −0.34pt a year

USE0.79%USG0.45%

Avg volume · 30D

USE 1.1×the volume

USE4.8KUSG4.23K

3Y return · a year

USG +1.2pt

USE+18.2%USG+19.4%

USE vs USG Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+63.6%USE−6.4%USG

Expense ratio: USE 0.79%; USG 0.45%, better
Fund size: USE $3M; USG $9M
1Y total return: USE +63.6%, better; USG −6.4%
Yield (12M): USE 1.76%; USG 32.00%, better
Holdings: USE 6; USG 3
Avg volume (30D): USE 4.8K sh, better; USG 4.23K sh
NAV per share: USE $40.21; USG $29.84
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for USE, USG, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	USE	USG
Cost30% weight	C53	A99Higher
Mission25% weight	Not scored	Not scored
Risk15% weight	D34Higher	D32
Tradability15% weight	D34Higher	D27
Holdings10% weight	Not scored	Not scored
Durability5% weight	D26	D39Higher

Rank among Commodity Futures funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. USE and USG are both graded against the same 13 Commodity Futures funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Commodity Futures⁠

Category · 13 funds

See all 13 ›

USG ranks 5th and USE 9th of 13 funds in the Commodity Futures Category.

Rank 4BCMDTPIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded FundScore 64
Rank 5BUSGUSCF Gold Strategy Plus Income FundScore 62
Rank 6BDBBInvesco DB Base Metals FundScore 61
Rank 9CEVMTInvesco Electric Vehicle Metals Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETFScore 40
Rank 9CUSEUSCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return FundScore 40
Rank 11DKCCAKraneShares California Carbon Allowance Strategy ETFScore 29

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

USECUSCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund

USGBUSCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund

In short

USE Most commodity funds hand you the whole grocery basket. USE shops one aisle: oil, petroleum and natural gas, run through derivatives with an absolute-return mandate instead of a buy-and-hold index.

USG Gold with a paycheck attached. USG holds claims on real gold bars plus collateralized futures, sells call options against that gold, and distributes quarterly, at one of the lowest fees in the commodity-futures crowd.

Stated mandate

USE The report identifies USE as a Commodity Pool Fund whose strategy is implemented primarily through commodity-linked derivatives, with subsidiary exposure used to support RIC tax requirements.

USG The Fund seeks long-term results that generally correspond to gold-price performance while generating dividend income from selling gold call options and collateral interest. It obtains gold exposure through gold warrants, collateralized futures, and related derivatives.

Why people hold it

USE Single-theme by design. The mandate points at oil, petroleum and natural gas, not the metals-grains-energy grab bag inside diversified peers like PDBC or HARD.
Costs 0.79% a year, a shade under the typical commodity-futures fund and below index peers such as DBB at 0.81%.
Clean plumbing for a futures strategy: a commodity pool built on commodity-linked derivatives, with a subsidiary sleeve used to support RIC tax treatment.

USG At 0.45% a year it charges well under the 0.79% cohort median, and less than top-ranked commodity peers PDBC, SOYB and WEAT.
Gold that throws off cash: the fund writes call options against its gold exposure and earns collateral interest, then pays shareholders quarterly.uscfinvestments.com
Exposure comes via COMEX gold warrants (ownership claims on bars in licensed depositories) and fully collateralized futures, actively run through a Cayman subsidiary capped at 25% of assets.alpsinc.com
USCF states the fund delivers its gold-plus-income strategy without a K-1, sparing the tax-form headache common to commodity products.uscfinvestments.com alpsinc.com

Worth knowing

USE A small fund that trades thinly. That usually shows up as wider spreads and more attention needed on how orders get placed.
Energy futures move sharply in both directions, and an absolute-return label does not mute that. It sits in the lower half of its commodity-futures peer group.
Launched in 2023, so the operating history is short, and cash goes out at most once or twice a year rather than on a monthly rhythm.

USG Covered calls swap upside for income. Above the strike plus premium collected, further gold gains go to the option buyer, while the fund keeps the downside if gold slides.alpsinc.com
A small fund that trades thinly, so bid-ask spreads can run wider than on the household-name gold ETFs.
Payouts can include return of capital, meaning part of a distribution may be capital coming back rather than income the fund earned.

Full USE profile⁠

Full USG profile⁠

USE vs USG Holdings

How USE and USG differ

Overlap by weight

52.5%

Shared holdings make up 54.0% of USE and 53.5% of USG.

Level by level

Asset classAlternatives, Commodities0.0%
Holdings0 in both52.5%

Sector

No Sector split for USE and USG.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

No country split for USE and USG.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

USE112.8%
USG100.0%

Securities held

USE2
USG1

Asset class

USE: Alternatives
USG: Commodities

Holdings

Only in USE2
In both0
Only in USG1

Only in USE

2 securities, 14.7% of USE by weight

NATURAL GAS FUTR Oct2713.68%
Micro WTI Crude F Jan271.02%

Only in USG

1 security, 46.6% of USG by weight

Gold 100 Oz Futr DEC2646.57%

Weight gaps

USE and USG share no securities.

All 32 USE holdings⁠All USG holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

USE vs USG Cost

Overpaying USE vs USG

$6,133

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

USE 0.79%
$15,174
USG 0.45%
$9,041

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

USE 0.79%
USG 0.45%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	USE	USG	Overpaying
10	$1,405	$812	$593
20	$5,331	$3,128	$2,203
30	$15,174	$9,041	$6,133

Expense ratio

0.79%USE
0.45%USG, cheaper

USG0.45%USE0.79%

0.45%3.50%

Middle half of Commodity Futures funds
Median 0.79%

USG cheapest of 13 funds

USE 7th cheapest of 13 funds

USE vs USG Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026

Yield (12M): USE 1.76%; USG 32.00%, better
Payout (12M): USE $0.70; USG $9.52
Last payment: USE $0.70; USG $0.17
Ex-dividend: USE Dec 22, 2025; USG Sep 21, 2026
Paid on: USE Dec 23, 2025; USG Sep 23, 2026
Frequency: USE Annual; USG Quarterly

Distribution history

Per share, 2022 to 2026, same scale for both

USEAnnual · 4 paymentsAll USE payments⁠

USGQuarterly · 18 paymentsAll USG payments⁠

USE vs USG Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: USE 34.5%USG 17.1%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: USE 0.52USG 0.87, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: USE −28.2%since May 2023USG −28.8%since Nov 2021
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: USE 1.37USG 0.28; Market = 1

Popular comparisons

USECvsPDBCA
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund · Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF
Expense ratio
0.79% · 0.59%
Category
USGBvsPDBCA
USCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund · Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.59%
Category
USECvsSOYBB
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund · Teucrium Soybean Fund
Expense ratio
0.79% · 0.63%
Category
USGBvsSOYBB
USCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund · Teucrium Soybean Fund
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.63%
Category
USECvsWEATB
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund · Teucrium Wheat Fund
Expense ratio
0.79% · 0.62%
Category
USGBvsWEATB
USCF Gold Strategy Plus Income Fund · Teucrium Wheat Fund
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.62%
Category