What changed in this filing

/stocks — the workspaceLOADING

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis

2025-08-08 compared with 2025-05-09 · 98 added, 76 removed, 384 unchanged (31% of the section changed)

46 unchanged sentences

If deemed necessary by the NYMEX and/or ICE Futures, UGA could be ordered to reduce its aggregate net position back to the accountability level.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA held 935 futures contracts for gasoline traded on the NYMEX.

As March 31, 2025, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on ICE Futures.

For the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA did not exceed any accountability levels on the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA held 831 futures contracts for gasoline traded on the NYMEX.

As June 30, 2025, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on ICE Futures.

For the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not exceed any accountability levels on the NYMEX or ICE Futures.

Position limits differ from accountability levels in that they represent fixed limits on the maximum number of futures contracts that any person may hold and cannot allow such limits to be exceeded without express CFTC authority to do so.

2 unchanged sentences

Investors should note that the foregoing accountability levels and position limits are subject to change, which in turn could change the amount and type of permitted investments in which UGA invests.

For the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA did not exceed any position limits imposed by the NYMEX and ICE Futures.

For the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not exceed any position limits imposed by the NYMEX and ICE Futures.

Federal Position Limits

70 unchanged sentences

Price Movements

Gasoline futures prices were volatile during the three months ended March 31, 2025.

Gasoline futures prices were volatile during the six months ended June 30, 2025.

The price of the Benchmark Futures Contract started the period at $2.0090 per gallon.

The high of the period was on February 18, 2025 when the price reached $2.3222 per gallon.

The low for the period was on December 31, 2024, which was $2.0092 per gallon.

The high of the period was on April 2, 2025 when the price reached $2.331 per gallon.

The low for the period was on April 10, 2025, which was $1.961 per gallon.

The period ended with the Benchmark Futures Contract at $2.0720 per gallon, an increase of approximately 3.13% over the period (investors are cautioned that these represent prices for gasoline on a wholesale basis and should not be directly compared to retail prices at a gasoline service station).

UGA’s per share NAV began the period at $62.94 and ended the period at $64.28 on March 31, 2025, an increase of approximately 2.13% over the period.

The Benchmark Futures Contract prices listed above began with the February 2025 contracts and ended with the May 2025 contracts.

UGA’s per share NAV began the period at $62.94 and ended the period at $60.28 on June 30, 2025, a decrease of approximately (4.23)% over the period.

The Benchmark Futures Contract prices listed above began with the February 2025 contracts and ended with the August 2025 contracts.

An increase of approximately 3.13% on the Benchmark Futures Contract listed above is a hypothetical return only and would not actually be realized by an investor holding Futures Contracts.

1 unchanged sentence

Furthermore, the change in the nominal price of these differing Futures Contracts, measured from the start of the year to the end of the year, does not represent the actual benchmark results that UGA seeks to track, which are more fully described below in the section titled “ Tracking UGA’s Benchmark .”

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, the gasoline futures market experienced states of both contango and backwardation as represented by the front month gasoline futures contract and the next to expire gasoline futures contract.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the gasoline futures market experienced states of both contango and backwardation as represented by the front month gasoline futures contract and the next to expire gasoline futures contract.

During periods of contango, the price of the near month gasoline Futures Contract was lower than the price of the next month gasoline Futures Contract or contracts further away from expiration.

13 unchanged sentences

Results of Operations.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA had 1,400,000 shares outstanding.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA had 1,200,000 shares outstanding.

On January 27, 2023, the SEC declared effective a registration statement filed by UGA that registered an unlimited number of shares.

1 unchanged sentence

More shares may have been issued by UGA than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA had the following Authorized Participants:

Citadel Securities, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co., JP Morgan Securities Inc., Jane Street Capital LLC, Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan Stanley & Co LLC, RBC Capital Markets LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, and Virtu Americas LLC.

For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Compared to the Three Months Ended March 31, 2024

March 31, 2025

March 31, 2024

As of June 30, 2025, UGA had the following Authorized Participants:

Citadel Securities, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co., Jane Street Capital, LLC, JP Morgan Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan Stanley & Co LLC, RBC Capital Markets LLC, SG Americas Securities LLC, and Virtu Americas LLC.

For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30, 2024

Six months ended

June 30, 2025

June 30, 2024

Average daily total net assets

9 unchanged sentences

The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by UGA, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024.

As a result, the amount of income earned by UGA as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024.

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by UGA, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the six months ended June 30, 2024.

As a result, the amount of income earned by UGA as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the six months ended June 30, 2024.

To the degree that the aggregate yield is lower, the net expense ratio, inclusive of income, will be higher.

The increase in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024, was due primarily to an increase in professional fees and directors’ fees and insurance partially offset by a increase/decrease in commissions.

The increase in total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2024, was due primarily to a higher number of Gasoline Futures Contracts being held and traded.

The increase in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the six months ended June 30, 2024, was due primarily to an increase in professional fees and directors’ fees and insurance partially offset by a decrease in commissions

The decrease in total commissions accrued to brokers for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the six months ended June 30, 2024, was due primarily to a lower number of Gasoline Futures Contracts being held and traded.

For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30, 2024

June 30, 2025

June 30, 2024

Average daily total net assets

Dividend and interest income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents

Annualized yield based on average daily total net assets

Management fee

Total fees and other expenses excluding management fees

Total commissions accrued to brokers

Total commissions as annualized percentage of average total net assets

Portfolio Expenses .

UGA’s expenses consist of investment management fees, brokerage fees and commissions, certain offering costs, licensing fees, registration fees, the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF and expenses relating to tax accounting and reporting requirements.

The management fee that UGA pays to USCF is calculated as a percentage of the total net assets of UGA.

The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.

Average interest rates earned on short-term investments held by UGA, including cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries, were lower during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024.

As a result, the amount of income earned by UGA as a percentage of average daily total net assets was lower during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024.

To the degree that the aggregate yield is lower, the net expense ratio, inclusive of income, will be higher.

The decrease in total fees and other expenses excluding management fees for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, was due primarily to a decrease in professional fees, directors’ fees and insurance and commissions.

The decrease in total commissions accrued to brokers for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, was due primarily to a lower number of Gasoline Futures Contracts being held and traded.

Tracking UGA’s Benchmark

4 unchanged sentences

USCF believes that it is not practical to manage the portfolio to achieve such an investment goal when investing in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments.

For the 30-valuation days ended March 31, 2025, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was (0.029)%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was (0.017)%.

For the 30-valuation days ended June 30, 2025, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was 0.004%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was 0.016%.

The average daily difference was 0.012% (or 1.2 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period UGA’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

Since the commencement of the offering of UGA’s shares to the public on February 26, 2008 to March 31, 2025, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was 0.034%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was 0.035%.

Since the commencement of the offering of UGA’s shares to the public on February 26, 2008 to June 30, 2025, the average daily change in the Benchmark Futures Contract was 0.032%, while the average daily change in the per share NAV of UGA over the same time period was 0.033%.

The average daily difference was 0.001% (or 0.1 basis points, where 1 basis point equals 1/100 of 1%), meaning that over this time period UGA’s NAV performed within the plus or minus 10% range established as its benchmark tracking goal.

The following two charts demonstrate the correlation between the changes in UGA’s NAV and the changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract.

The first chart below shows the daily movement of UGA’s per share NAV versus the daily movement of the Benchmark Futures Contract for the 30 valuation day period ended March 31, 2025, the last trading day in March.

The second chart below shows the monthly total returns of UGA as compared to the monthly value of the Benchmark Futures Contract for the five years ended March 31, 2025.

The first chart below shows the daily movement of UGA’s per share NAV versus the daily movement of the Benchmark Futures Contract for the 30 valuation day period ended June 30, 2025, the last trading day in June.

The second chart below shows the monthly total returns of UGA as compared to the monthly value of the Benchmark Futures Contract for the five years ended June 30, 2024.

*PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

1 unchanged sentence

An alternative tracking measurement of the return performance of UGA versus the return of its Benchmark Futures Contract can be calculated by comparing the actual return of UGA, measured by changes in its per share NAV, versus the expected changes in its per share NAV under the assumption that UGA’s returns had been exactly the same as the daily changes in its Benchmark Futures Contract.

For the three months ended March 31, 2025, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 2.13%.

This is based on an initial per share NAV of $62.94 as of December 31, 2024 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2025 of $64.28.

For the six months ended June 30, 2025, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was (4.23)%.

This is based on an initial per share NAV of $62.94 as of December 31, 2024 and an ending per share NAV as of June 30, 2025 of $60.28.

During this time period, UGA made no distributions to its shareholders.

However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $63.78 as of March 31, 2025, for a total return over the relevant time period of 1.34%.

The difference between the

actual per share NAV total return of UGA of 2.13% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of 1.34% was a difference over the time period of 0.79%, which is to say that UGA’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage.

However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $59.35 as of June 30, 2025, for a total return over the relevant time period of (5.70)%.

The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of UGA of (4.23)% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of (5.70)% was a difference over the time period of 1.48%, which is to say that UGA’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage.

UGA incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses.

The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly lower or higher than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

By comparison, for the three months ended March 31, 2024, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 17.15%.

This is based on an initial per share NAV of $60.64 as of December 31, 2023 and an ending per share NAV as of March 31, 2024 of $71.04.

The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly higher or lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

By comparison, for the six months ended June 30, 2024, the actual total return of UGA as measured by changes in its per share NAV was 11.30%.

This is based on an initial per share NAV of $60.64 as of December 31, 2023 and an ending per share NAV as of June 30, 2024 of $67.49.

During this time period, UGA made no distributions to its shareholders.

However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $70.31 as of March 31, 2024, for a total return over the relevant time period of 15.95%.

However, if UGA’s daily changes in its per share NAV had instead exactly tracked the changes in the daily total return of the Benchmark Futures Contract, UGA would have had an estimated per share NAV of $66.09 as of June 30, 2024, for a total return over the relevant time period of 8.99%.

The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of UGA of 11.30% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of 8.99% was a difference over the time period of 2.31%, which is to say that UGA’s actual total return outperformed its benchmark by that percentage.

UGA incurs expenses primarily composed of the management fee, brokerage commissions for the buying and selling of futures contracts, and other expenses.

The impact of these expenses, offset by interest and dividend income, and net of positive or negative execution, tends to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly higher or lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

There are three factors that typically have impacted or are most likely to impact UGA’s ability to accurately track its Benchmark Futures Contract in addition to the foregoing.

1 unchanged sentence

In that case, UGA may pay a price that is higher, or lower, than the closing settlement price of the Benchmark Futures Contract, which could cause the changes in the daily per share NAV of UGA to either be higher or lower relative to the daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Benchmark Futures Contract at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, USCF attempted to minimize the effect of these transactions by seeking to execute its purchase or sale of the Benchmark Futures Contract at, or as close as possible to, the end of the day settlement price.

However, it may not always be possible for UGA to obtain the settlement price and there is no assurance that failure to obtain the closing settlement price in the future will not adversely impact UGA’s attempt to track the Benchmark Futures Contract.

2 unchanged sentences

At the same time, UGA earns dividend and interest income on its cash, cash equivalents and Treasuries.

UGA is not required to distribute any portion of its income to its shareholders and did not make any distributions to shareholders during the three months ended March 31, 2025.

UGA is not required to distribute any portion of its income to its shareholders and did not make any distributions to shareholders during the six months ended June 30, 2025.

Interest payments, and any other income, were retained within the portfolio and added to UGA’s NAV.

5 unchanged sentences

It is anticipated that fees and expenses paid by UGA may be lower than interest earned by UGA.

As such, USCF anticipates that UGA could possibly outperform its benchmark so long as interest earned is greater than the fees and expenses paid by UGA.

USCF anticipates that UGA could possibly outperform its benchmark so long as interest earned is greater than the fees and expenses paid by UGA.

Third, UGA may hold Other Gasoline-Related Investments in its portfolio that may fail to closely track the Benchmark Futures Contract’s total return movements.

In that case, the error in tracking the Benchmark Futures Contract could result in daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA that are either too high, or too low, relative to the daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA did not hold any Other Gasoline-Related Investments.

If UGA increases in size, and due to its obligations to comply with market conditions, regulatory limits, and risk mitigation measures imposed by its FCMs, UGA may invest in Other Gasoline-Related Investments, such as OTC swaps, which may have the effect of increasing transaction related expenses

and may result in increased tracking error.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not hold any Other Gasoline-Related Investments.

OTC swaps increase transaction-related expenses due to the fact that UGA must pay to the swap counterparty certain fees that UGA does not have to pay for transactions executed on an exchange.

24 unchanged sentences

As a result, it would be possible for the new near month futures contract to rise only 10% while the spot price of gasoline may have risen a higher amount, e.g., 12%.

Similarly, the spot price of gasoline could have fallen 10% while the value of an investment in the second month futures contract might have fallen another amount, e.g., 12%.

Similarly, the spot price of gasoline could have fallen 10% while the value of an investment in the second month futures contract might have fallen another

amount, e.g., 12%.

Over time, if contango remained constant, this difference between the spot price and the futures contract price would continue to increase.

8 unchanged sentences

The gasoline market spent time in both backwardation and contango during the last ten years.

The chart below shows the results from subtracting the next month contract price from the price of the near month contract for the 10-year period between March 31, 2015 and March 31, 2025.

The chart below shows the results from subtracting the next month contract price from the price of the near month contract for the 10-year period between June 30, 2015 and June 30, 2025.

Investors will note that the near month gasoline futures contract spent time in both backwardation and contango.

1 unchanged sentence

While the investment objective of UGA is not to have the market price of its shares match, dollar for dollar, changes in the spot price of gasoline, contango and backwardation have impacted the total return on an investment in UGA shares during the past year relative to a hypothetical direct investment in gasoline.

For example, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2024 and held until March 31, 2025 increased based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately 2.13%, while the front month futures contract of gasoline during the same period decreased by –% (note:

For example, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2024 and held until June 30, 2025 decreased based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately (4.23)%, while the front month futures contract of gasoline during the same period decreased by (5.70)% (note:

this comparison ignores seasonal factors and the potential costs associated with physically owning and storing gasoline, which could be substantial).

By comparison, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2023 and held to March 31, 2024 decreased based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately 17.15%, while the front month futures contract of gasoline during the same period increased by 15.95% (note:

By comparison, an investment in UGA shares made on December 31, 2023 and held to June 30, 2024 increased based upon the changes in the NAV for UGA shares on those days, by approximately 11.30%, while the front month futures contract of gasoline during the same period increased by 8.99% (note:

this comparison ignores the potential costs associated with physically owning and storing gasoline, which could be substantial).

4 unchanged sentences

Gasoline Market.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, the price of the front RBOB month gasoline futures contract traded in a range between $1.9489 and $2.2831.

Prices increased 14.07% from the end of 2024 through March 31, 2025, finishing the quarter at $2.2831.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the price of the front RBOB month gasoline futures contract traded in a range between $1.949 and $2.331.

Prices increased 3.91% from the end of 2024 through June 30, 2025, finishing the quarter at $2.0798.

USCF believes that over both the medium-term and the long-term, changes in the price of crude oil will exert the greatest influence on the price of refined petroleum products such as gasoline.

20 unchanged sentences

Since early 2023, crude oil prices have traded mostly between approximately $65 to $80, with several prominent price reversals.

In the first quarter of 2025, U.S.

In the second quarter of 2025, U.S.

crude oil production averaged 13.4 mbd.

production has risen since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

production rose significantly over the last five years but is down year-to-date.

OPEC crude production declined from late 2022 through the third quarter of 2024 as the cartel supported prices with overall quotas and voluntary output cuts by certain countries, particularly Saudi Arabia.

OPEC output rose moderately during the six months ending March 31, 2025, but remained well below pre- and post-pandemic highs.

OPEC output rose during the six months ending June 30, 2025, but remained below pre- and post-pandemic highs.

OPEC fiercely supported prices with voluntary cuts and production quotas over the last several years.

The cartel announced plans to begin unwinding voluntary cuts and increasing quotas in 2024 but delayed and adjusted these plans several times.

The cartel announced plans to begin unwinding voluntary cuts and increasing quotas in 2024 and has begun to do so after delaying and adjusting these plans several times.

OPEC reaffirmed its commitment to maintaining oil market stability and retains the flexibility to change plans as market conditions warrant.

Nevertheless, the long-expected and repeatedly delayed reduction of quotas and voluntary cuts is finally underway.

While not a complete policy reversal, the “OPEC put” which kept a floor on prices over the last several years has likely moved lower at a time when demand could also decline, increasing the potential for downward pressure on prices.

Russia and OPEC have still not returned to pre-pandemic production levels, while the U.S.

has become the world’s largest crude oil producing nation and other oil producing nations have also increased their output.

In the U.S., the Trump administration has aggressively called for increased domestic production and its actions have and

will make more drilling possible.

In the U.S., the Trump administration has aggressively called for increased domestic production and its actions have and will make more drilling possible.

However, U.S.

drillers have shown restraint in recent years, and it is likely that ongoing growth in U.S.

production will continue along the same trajectory.

drillers have shown restraint in recent years, and production is down from 2024 records.

Technology, geology, and economics tend to be larger determinants of U.S.

production levels than political policy.

In April of 2025, two events significantly increased risks to global energy prices, particularly crude oil.

First, the Trump administration announced large and widespread tariffs on trading partners.

In April of 2025, the Trump administration announced large and widespread tariffs on trading partners.

While no tariffs on crude oil itself were announced, and the administration later paused tariff implementation and announced changing tariff levels on a country-by-country basis, the overall impact of the administration’s actions has materially increased the risk of a global economic slowdown or recession, which would reduce demand for crude oil.

Second, eight OPEC nations announced their intention to reduce their voluntary cuts by over 400,000 barrels per day, starting in May 2025, and to move forward with their plans to gradually cease all voluntary cuts which currently total 2.2 million barrels per day.

OPEC reaffirmed its commitment to maintaining oil market stability and retains the flexibility to change plans as market conditions warrant.

Nevertheless, the long-expected and repeatedly delayed reduction of quotas and voluntary cuts is finally underway.

As negotiations with trading partners continue, final trade policy remains elusive and crude oil prices may be volatile as a result.

The current geopolitical situation adds complexity to the supply-demand equation.

Tensions in the Middle East remain a flash point for risk to crude oil supply, which could raise prices.

Conversely, progress towards a potential resolution to the Russia-Ukraine war could ease supply disruptions, sanctions, and price volatility, which could lower prices.

In June of 2025, Israel and the United States attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities, raising speculation that Iran might attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz.

As approximately 20% of global petroleum consumption transits the Strait daily, this could have a significant effect on prices.

As it stands, Iran did not close the Strait, and prices fell back to the mid-$65 range after briefly topping $75.

Tensions in the Middle East and other regions remain a flash point for risk to crude oil supply, which could raise prices.

Conversely, any resolution of geopolitical conflicts could ease supply disruptions, sanctions, and price volatility, which could lower prices.

Unleaded Gasoline Price Movements in Comparison to Other Energy Commodities and Investment Categories .

2 unchanged sentences

The correlation is scaled between 1 and -1, where 1 indicates that the two investment options move up or down in price or value together, known as “positive correlation,” and -1 indicates that they move in completely opposite directions, known as “negative correlation.” A correlation of 0 would mean that the movements of the two are neither positively nor negatively correlated, known as “non-correlation.” That is, the investment options sometimes move up and down together and other times move in opposite directions.

For the ten-year time period between March 31, 2015 and March 31, 2025, the table below compares the monthly movements of unleaded gasoline prices versus the monthly movements of the prices of several other energy commodities, such as natural gas, crude oil and diesel-heating oil, as well as several major non-commodity investment asset classes, such as large cap U.S.

For the ten-year time period between June 30, 2015 and June 30, 2025, the table below compares the monthly movements of unleaded gasoline prices versus the monthly movements of the prices of several other energy commodities, such as natural gas, crude oil and diesel-heating oil, as well as several major non-commodity investment asset classes, such as large cap U.S.

equities, U.S.

2 unchanged sentences

Gasoline - 10 Years

Equities (S&P

Equities (FTSE

Correlation Matrix 10 Years

(BEUSG4 Index)

(FTSE World Index)

Large Cap US Equities (S&P 500)

6 unchanged sentences

Gasoline - 1 Year

Equities (S&P

US Gov’t Bonds

Equities (FTSE

Correlation Matrix 1 Year

(BEUSG4 Index)

(FTSE World Index)

Large Cap US Equities (S&P 500)

6 unchanged sentences

USCF believes that gasoline has historically not demonstrated a strong correlation with equities or bonds over long periods of time.

However, USCF also believes that in the future it is possible that gasoline could have long term correlation results that indicate prices of gasoline more closely track the movements of equities or bonds.

However, USCF also believes that

in the future it is possible that gasoline could have long term correlation results that indicate prices of gasoline more closely track the movements of equities or bonds.

In addition, USCF believes that, when measured over time periods shorter than ten years, there will always be some periods where the correlation of gasoline to equities and bonds will be either more strongly positively correlated or more strongly negatively correlated than the long-term historical results suggest.

21 unchanged sentences

Income received from UGA’s investments in money market funds and Treasuries is paid to UGA.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA’s expenses did not exceed the income UGA earned and the cash earned from the sale of Creation Baskets and the redemption of Redemption Baskets.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA did not use other assets to pay expenses.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA’s expenses did not exceed the income UGA earned and the cash earned from the sale of Creation Baskets and the redemption of Redemption Baskets.

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not use other assets to pay expenses.

To the extent income exceeds expenses, UGA’s NAV will be positively impacted.

9 unchanged sentences

Such market conditions could prevent UGA from promptly liquidating its positions in Futures Contracts.

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, UGA did not purchase or liquidate any of its positions while daily limits were in effect;

During the six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not purchase or liquidate any of its positions while daily limits were in effect;

however, UGA cannot predict whether such an event may occur in the future.

8 unchanged sentences

The aggregate market value of the contracts will significantly exceed UGA’s future cash requirements since UGA intends to close out its open positions prior to settlement.

As a result, UGA is

generally only subject to the risk of loss arising from the change in value of the contracts.

As a result, UGA is generally only subject to the risk of loss arising from the change in value of the contracts.

UGA considers the “fair value” of its derivative instruments to be the unrealized gain or loss on the contracts.

17 unchanged sentences

In the future UGA may purchase OTC swaps, see “Item 3.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for a discussion of OTC swaps.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA held cash deposits and short-term investments in the amount of $85,617,970 with the custodian and FCMs.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA held cash deposits and short-term investments in the amount of $76,895,601 with the custodian and FCMs.

Some or all of these amounts held by a custodian or an FCM, as applicable, may be subject to loss should UGA’s custodian or FCMs, as applicable, cease operations.

Off Balance Sheet Financing

As of March 31, 2025, UGA had no loan guarantee, credit support or other off-balance sheet arrangements of any kind other than agreements entered into in the normal course of business, which may include indemnification provisions relating to certain risks that service providers undertake in performing services which are in the best interests of UGA.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA had no loan guarantee, credit support or other off-balance sheet arrangements of any kind other than agreements entered into in the normal course of business, which may include indemnification provisions relating to certain risks that service providers undertake in performing services which are in the best interests of UGA.

While UGA’s exposure under these indemnification provisions cannot be estimated, they are not expected to have a material impact on UGA’s financial position.

18 unchanged sentences

Either party may terminate these agreements earlier for certain reasons described in the agreements.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA’s portfolio held 935 Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX.

As of March 31, 2025, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA’s portfolio held 831 Futures Contracts traded on the NYMEX.

As of June 30, 2025, UGA did not hold any Futures Contracts traded on the ICE Futures.

For a list of UGA’s current holdings, please see UGA’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com.

2 unchanged sentences

Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.

What changed 10-Q

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis