EDGH vs. ZSB

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

EDGH (3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF) and ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - EDGH is a Commodities fund actively managed by 3EDGE Asset Management, while ZSB is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index. EDGH is actively managed, while ZSB is passively managed. Over the past year, EDGH returned 25.60% vs 58.26% for ZSB. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EDGH charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ZSB.

Performance

EDGH vs. ZSB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EDGH achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly higher than ZSB's 4.29% return.

EDGH

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: 0.26%
• 6M: 3.32%
• YTD: 8.07%
• 1Y: 25.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZSB

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -4.06%
• 6M: -8.61%
• YTD: 4.29%
• 1Y: 58.26%
• 3Y*: -0.16%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EDGH vs. ZSB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF	8.07%	28.98%	-1.97%
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	4.29%	64.34%	-8.14%

Correlation

The correlation between EDGH and ZSB is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 3, 2024	0.45

Return for Risk

EDGH vs. ZSB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EDGH

EDGH Risk / Return Rank: 49
EDGH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
EDGH Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
EDGH Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EDGH Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
EDGH Martin Ratio Rank: 44

ZSB

ZSB Risk / Return Rank: 78
ZSB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
ZSB Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
ZSB Omega Ratio Rank: 86
ZSB Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ZSB Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

EDGH vs. ZSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB). 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.

	EDGH	ZSB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	2.21	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.77	2.67	-0.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.41	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	3.50	-1.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.77	8.38	-2.61

EDGH vs. ZSB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDGH Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the ZSB Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDGH and ZSB, 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

EDGH vs. ZSB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDGH drawdown since its inception was -12.47%, smaller than the maximum ZSB drawdown of -49.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDGH and ZSB.

Drawdown Indicators

	EDGH	ZSB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.47%	-49.26%	+36.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.47%	-16.75%	+4.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-43.22%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.54%	-12.07%	+3.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.48%	-30.30%	+27.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.45%	6.97%	-2.52%

Volatility

EDGH vs. ZSB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) is 4.01%, while USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that EDGH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZSB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EDGH	ZSB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.01%	5.06%	-1.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.99%	21.55%	-6.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.22%	26.57%	-8.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.56%	19.56%	-4.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.56%	19.56%	-4.00%

EDGH vs. ZSB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDGH has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSB's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

EDGH vs. ZSB - Dividend Comparison

EDGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than ZSB's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF	1.09%	1.18%	3.19%	0.00%
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	0.88%	0.92%	2.96%	3.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EDGH and ZSB in my portfolio?

EDGH and ZSB have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EDGH or ZSB?

ZSB has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to EDGH (4.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDGH dropped -12.47% vs ZSB's -49.26%.

Which ETF is better, EDGH or ZSB?

On 1-year performance, ZSB leads with 58.26% vs 25.60% for EDGH. On fees, ZSB is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, EDGH has been the lower-risk option at 4.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EDGH or ZSB?

Over the 1-year period, ZSB has performed better with a 58.26% return vs 25.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EDGH or ZSB?

ZSB is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for EDGH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EDGH or ZSB?

EDGH has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.88% for ZSB.

What is the main difference between EDGH and ZSB?

EDGH is categorized as Commodities, while ZSB is Lithium & Battery Metals. They also come from different issuers: 3EDGE Asset Management and USCF. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for EDGH and 0.59% for ZSB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZSB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.41), 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.