BFAP vs. ZCSH

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) and ZCSH (Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)) are both Cryptocurrency funds. BFAP is actively managed, while ZCSH is passively managed. Over the past year, BFAP returned -28.52% vs 679.80% for ZCSH. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 2.50%/yr for ZCSH.

Performance

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -23.65% return, which is significantly lower than ZCSH's -16.76% return.

BFAP

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -9.01%
• YTD: -23.65%
• 6M: -23.58%
• 1Y: -28.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZCSH

• 1D: 1.43%
• 1M: -42.26%
• YTD: -16.76%
• 6M: -15.03%
• 1Y: 679.80%
• 3Y*: 128.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	-23.65%	8.90%
ZCSH Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)	-16.76%	984.14%

Correlation

The correlation between BFAP and ZCSH is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	0.46

Return for Risk

BFAP vs. ZCSH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BFAP

BFAP Risk / Return Rank: 1
BFAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
BFAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Omega Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BFAP Martin Ratio Rank: 1

ZCSH

ZCSH Risk / Return Rank: 91
ZCSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZCSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
ZCSH Omega Ratio Rank: 81
ZCSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
ZCSH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BFAP	ZCSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.34	3.94	-5.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.88	3.55	-5.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	1.42	-0.65
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.85	9.86	-10.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.53	18.51	-20.04

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFAP Sharpe Ratio is -1.34, which is lower than the ZCSH Sharpe Ratio of 3.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFAP and ZCSH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -33.64%, smaller than the maximum ZCSH drawdown of -93.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and ZCSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFAP	ZCSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.64%	-93.73%	+60.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.64%	-69.62%	+35.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-71.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.64%	-50.35%	+16.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.78%	-73.97%	+62.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.63%	37.00%	-18.37%

Volatility

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) is 5.33%, while Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH) has a volatility of 64.56%. This indicates that BFAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZCSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFAP	ZCSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.33%	64.56%	-59.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.77%	107.11%	-90.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.45%	174.34%	-152.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.46%	138.25%	-117.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.46%	138.25%	-117.79%

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than ZCSH's 2.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFAP vs. ZCSH - Dividend Comparison

BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.85%, while ZCSH has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	24.85%	18.97%
ZCSH Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFAP and ZCSH in my portfolio?

BFAP and ZCSH have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BFAP or ZCSH?

ZCSH has higher volatility (64.56%) compared to BFAP (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -33.64% vs ZCSH's -93.73%.

Which ETF is better, BFAP or ZCSH?

On 1-year performance, ZCSH leads with 679.80% vs -28.52% for BFAP. On fees, BFAP is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, BFAP has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFAP or ZCSH?

Over the 1-year period, ZCSH has performed better with a 679.80% return vs -28.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFAP or ZCSH?

BFAP is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 2.50% for ZCSH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFAP or ZCSH?

BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 24.85%, compared with 0.00% for ZCSH.

What is the main difference between BFAP and ZCSH?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Grayscale. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFAP and 2.50% for ZCSH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZCSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 vs -1.34), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.