United States Gasoline Fund, LP

Previous wording

The accountability levels for the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts traded on U.S.-based futures exchanges, such as the NYMEX, are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which the NYMEX may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor’s positions. The current accountability level for investments for any one month in the Benchmark Futures Contract is 5,000 contracts. In addition, the NYMEX imposes an accountability level for all months of 7,000 net futures contracts for investments in futures contracts for gasoline. In addition, the ICE Futures maintains accountability levels, position limits and monitoring authority for its unleaded gasoline futures contracts. If UGA and the Related Public Funds exceed these accountability levels for investments in the futures contract for gasoline, the NYMEX and ICE Futures will monitor such exposure and may ask for further information on UGA’s and the Related Public Funds’ activities including the total size of all positions, investment and trading strategy, and the extent of liquidity resources of UGA and the Related Public Funds. 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.

Current wording

The accountability levels for the Benchmark Futures Contract and other Futures Contracts traded on U.S.-based futures exchanges, such as the NYMEX, are not a fixed ceiling, but rather a threshold above which the NYMEX may exercise greater scrutiny and control over an investor’s positions. The current accountability level for investments for any one month in the Benchmark Futures Contract is 5,000 contracts. In addition, the NYMEX imposes an accountability level for all months of 7,000 net futures contracts for investments in futures contracts for gasoline. In addition, the ICE Futures maintains accountability levels, position limits and monitoring authority for its unleaded gasoline futures contracts. If UGA and the Related Public Funds exceed these accountability levels for investments in the futures contract for gasoline, the NYMEX and ICE Futures will monitor such exposure and may ask for further information on UGA’s and the Related Public Funds’ activities including the total size of all positions, investment and trading strategy, and the extent of liquidity resources of UGA and the Related Public Funds. 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 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.

Previous wording

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. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that UGA will run up against such position limits because UGA’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire to the next month contract beginning two weeks from expiration of the contract. 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.

Current wording

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. In addition to accountability levels and position limits that may apply at any time, the NYMEX and ICE Futures impose position limits on contracts held in the last few days of trading in the near month contract to expire. It is unlikely that UGA will run up against such position limits because UGA’s investment strategy is to close out its positions and “roll” from the near month contract to expire to the next month contract beginning two weeks from expiration of the contract. 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 six months ended June 30, 2025, UGA did not exceed any position limits imposed by the NYMEX and ICE Futures.

Previous wording

Gasoline futures prices were volatile during the three months ended March 31, 2025. The price of the Benchmark Futures Contract started the period at $2.0092 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 period ended with the Benchmark Futures Contract at $2.2907 per gallon, an increase of approximately 14.01% 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. An increase of approximately 14.01% on the Benchmark Futures Contract listed above is a hypothetical return only and would not actually be realized by an investor holding Futures Contracts. An investment in Futures Contracts would need to be rolled forward during the time period described in order to simulate such a result. 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.”

Current wording

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 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 $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. An investment in Futures Contracts would need to be rolled forward during the time period described in order to simulate such a result. 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.”

Previous wording

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 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. During periods of backwardation, the price of the near month gasoline Futures Contract is higher than the

Current wording

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. During periods of backwardation, the price of the near month gasoline Futures Contract is higher than the

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2025, UGA had 1,400,000 shares outstanding. On January 27, 2023, the SEC declared effective a registration statement filed by UGA that registered an unlimited number of shares. As a result, UGA has an unlimited number of shares that can be issued in the form of Creation Baskets. More shares may have been issued by UGA than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares.

Current wording

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. As a result, UGA has an unlimited number of shares that can be issued in the form of Creation Baskets. More shares may have been issued by UGA than are outstanding due to the redemption of shares.

Previous wording

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.

Current wording

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.

Previous wording

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.

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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.

Current wording

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.

Previous wording

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)%. 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.

Current wording

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.

Previous wording

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%. 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.

Current wording

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.

Previous wording

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. 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.

Current wording

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 $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 higher or lower than daily changes in the price of the Benchmark Futures Contract.

Previous wording

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. 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%. The difference between the actual per share NAV total return of UGA of 17.15% and the expected total return based on the Benchmark Futures Contract of 15.95% was a difference over the time period of 1.20%, 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.

Current wording

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 $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.

Previous wording

First, UGA may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Benchmark Futures Contract at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which UGA executes the trade. 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. 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.

Current wording

First, UGA may buy or sell its holdings in the then current Benchmark Futures Contract at a price other than the closing settlement price of that contract on the day during which UGA executes the trade. 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 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.

Previous wording

Second, 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 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. 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. Interest payments, and any other income, were retained within the portfolio and added to UGA’s NAV. When this income exceeds the level of UGA’s expenses for its management fee, brokerage commissions and other expenses (including ongoing registration fees, licensing fees and the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF), UGA will realize a net yield that will tend to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly higher or lower than daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. If short-term interest rates rise above these levels, the level of deviation created by the yield would increase. Conversely, if short-term interest rates were to decline, the amount of error created by the yield would decrease. When short-term yields drop to a level lower than the combined expenses of the management fee and the brokerage commissions, then the tracking error becomes a negative number and would tend to cause the daily returns of the per share NAV to underperform the daily returns of the Benchmark Futures Contract. USCF anticipates that interest rates may continue to stagnate over the near future. 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.

Current wording

Second, 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 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. 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 six months ended June 30, 2025. Interest payments, and any other income, were retained within the portfolio and added to UGA’s NAV. When this income exceeds the level of UGA’s expenses for its management fee, brokerage commissions and other expenses (including ongoing registration fees, licensing fees and the fees and expenses of the independent directors of USCF), UGA will realize a net yield that will tend to cause daily changes in the per share NAV of UGA to track slightly higher or lower than daily changes in the Benchmark Futures Contract. If short-term interest rates rise above these levels, the level of deviation created by the yield would increase. Conversely, if short-term interest rates were to decline, the amount of error created by the yield would decrease. When short-term yields drop to a level lower than the combined expenses of the management fee and the brokerage commissions, then the tracking error becomes a negative number and would tend to cause the daily returns of the per share NAV to underperform the daily returns of the Benchmark Futures Contract. USCF anticipates that interest rates may continue to stagnate over the near future. It is anticipated that fees and expenses paid by UGA may be lower than interest earned by UGA. As such,

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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 six months ended June 30, 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. 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.

Previous wording

If the futures market is in contango, an investor would be buying a next month futures contract for a higher price than the current near month futures contract. Again, assuming the near month futures contract is $1.50 per gallon, the price of the next month futures contract might be $1.53 per gallon, or 2% more expensive than the front month futures contract. Hypothetically, and assuming no other changes, the value of the $1.53 next month futures contract would fall to $1.50 as it approaches expiration. In this example, the value of an investment in the second month would tend to underperform the spot price of gasoline. 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%. Over time, if contango remained constant, this difference between the spot price and the futures contract price would continue to increase.

Current wording

If the futures market is in contango, an investor would be buying a next month futures contract for a higher price than the current near month futures contract. Again, assuming the near month futures contract is $1.50 per gallon, the price of the next month futures contract might be $1.53 per gallon, or 2% more expensive than the front month futures contract. Hypothetically, and assuming no other changes, the value of the $1.53 next month futures contract would fall to $1.50 as it approaches expiration. In this example, the value of an investment in the second month would tend to underperform the spot price of gasoline. 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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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 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 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).

Previous wording

*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.

Current wording

Gasoline Market. 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.

Previous wording

In the first quarter of 2025, U.S. crude oil production averaged 13.5 mbd. U.S. production has risen since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. 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 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. 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

Current wording

In the second quarter of 2025, U.S. crude oil production averaged 13.4 mbd. U.S. 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 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 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. However, U.S. 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.

Previous wording

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. 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. 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 downward pressure on prices.

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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.

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Investors are cautioned that the historical price relationships between gasoline and various other energy commodities, as well as other investment asset classes, as measured by correlation may not be reliable predictors of future price movements and correlation results. The results pictured above would have been different if a different range of dates had been selected. 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. 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.

Current wording

Investors are cautioned that the historical price relationships between gasoline and various other energy commodities, as well as other investment asset classes, as measured by correlation may not be reliable predictors of future price movements and correlation results. The results pictured above would have been different if a different range of dates had been selected. 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

Previous wording

UGA currently generates cash primarily from: (i) the sale of baskets consisting of 50,000 shares (“Creation Baskets”) and (ii) income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents. UGA has allocated substantially all of its net assets to trading in Gasoline Interests. UGA invests in Gasoline Interests to the fullest extent possible without being leveraged or unable to satisfy its current or potential margin or collateral obligations with respect to its investments in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments. A significant portion of UGA’s NAV is held in cash and cash equivalents that are used as margin and as collateral for its trading in Gasoline Interests. The balance of the assets is held in UGA’s account at its custodian bank and in investments in money market funds and Treasuries at the FCMs. 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. To the extent income exceeds expenses, UGA’s NAV will be positively impacted.

Current wording

UGA currently generates cash primarily from: (i) the sale of baskets consisting of 50,000 shares (“Creation Baskets”) and (ii) income earned on Treasuries, cash and/or cash equivalents. UGA has allocated substantially all of its net assets to trading in Gasoline Interests. UGA invests in Gasoline Interests to the fullest extent possible without being leveraged or unable to satisfy its current or potential margin or collateral obligations with respect to its investments in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments. A significant portion of UGA’s NAV is held in cash and cash equivalents that are used as margin and as collateral for its trading in Gasoline Interests. The balance of the assets is held in UGA’s account at its custodian bank and in investments in money market funds and Treasuries at the FCMs. Income received from UGA’s investments in money market funds and Treasuries is paid to UGA. 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.

Previous wording

UGA’s investments in Gasoline Interests may be subject to periods of illiquidity because of market conditions, regulatory considerations and other reasons. For example, most commodity exchanges limit the fluctuations in futures contracts prices during a single day by regulations referred to as “daily limits.” During a single day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. Once the price of a futures contract has increased or decreased by an amount equal to the daily limit, positions in the contracts can neither be taken nor liquidated unless the traders are willing to effect trades at or within the specified daily limit. 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; however, UGA cannot predict whether such an event may occur in the future.

Current wording

UGA’s investments in Gasoline Interests may be subject to periods of illiquidity because of market conditions, regulatory considerations and other reasons. For example, most commodity exchanges limit the fluctuations in futures contracts prices during a single day by regulations referred to as “daily limits.” During a single day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. Once the price of a futures contract has increased or decreased by an amount equal to the daily limit, positions in the contracts can neither be taken nor liquidated unless the traders are willing to effect trades at or within the specified daily limit. Such market conditions could prevent UGA from promptly liquidating its positions in Futures Contracts. 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.

Previous wording

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. The market risk associated with UGA’s commitments to purchase gasoline is limited to the aggregate market value of the contracts held. However, should UGA enter into a contractual commitment to sell gasoline, it would be required to make delivery of the gasoline at the contract price, repurchase the contract at prevailing prices or settle in cash. Since there are no limits on the future price of gasoline, the market risk to UGA could be unlimited.

Current wording

Trading in Futures Contracts and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, such as forwards, involves UGA entering into contractual commitments to purchase or sell gasoline at a specified date in the future. 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. UGA considers the “fair value” of its derivative instruments to be the unrealized gain or loss on the contracts. The market risk associated with UGA’s commitments to purchase gasoline is limited to the aggregate market value of the contracts held. However, should UGA enter into a contractual commitment to sell gasoline, it would be required to make delivery of the gasoline at the contract price, repurchase the contract at prevailing prices or settle in cash. Since there are no limits on the future price of gasoline, the market risk to UGA could be unlimited.

Previous wording

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. 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.

Current wording

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.

Previous wording

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. For a list of UGA’s current holdings, please see UGA’s website at www.uscfinvestments.com. The end of day portfolio disclosed on UGA’s website would reflect any investments in Futures Contracts beyond the Benchmark Gasoline Futures Contract, and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, including any made in light of market conditions, regulatory requirements, risk mitigation measures (including those that may be taken by UGA, UGA’s FCMs, counterparties or other market participants), liquidity requirements, and other factors. Independent of the UGA website UGA may make available portfolio holdings to Authorized Participants that reflects UGA’s anticipated holdings.

Current wording

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. The end of day portfolio disclosed on UGA’s website would reflect any investments in Futures Contracts beyond the Benchmark Gasoline Futures Contract, and Other Gasoline-Related Investments, including any made in light of market conditions, regulatory requirements, risk mitigation measures (including those that may be taken by UGA, UGA’s FCMs, counterparties or other market participants), liquidity requirements, and other factors. Independent of the UGA website UGA may make available portfolio holdings to Authorized Participants that reflects UGA’s anticipated holdings.