ETCG vs. EZET

Last updated Apr 3, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC) (ETCG) and Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET).

ETCG and EZET are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ETCG is a passively managed fund by Grayscale that tracks the performance of the Ethereum Classic (ETC). It was launched on Apr 24, 2017. EZET is a passively managed fund by Franklin Templeton that tracks the performance of the CME CF Ether-Dollar Reference Rate - New York Variant. It was launched on Jul 23, 2024. Both ETCG and EZET are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

ETCG vs. EZET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC) (ETCG) and Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

ETCG vs. EZET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ETCG Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC)	-34.44%	-39.78%	-5.11%
EZET Franklin Ethereum ETF	-30.51%	-11.23%	-3.68%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ETCG achieves a -34.44% return, which is significantly lower than EZET's -30.51% return.

ETCG

• 1D: -3.58%
• 1M: -6.75%
• YTD: -34.44%
• 6M: -55.34%
• 1Y: -42.54%
• 3Y*: -14.57%
• 5Y*: -19.64%
• 10Y*: —

EZET

• 1D: -3.63%
• 1M: 4.40%
• YTD: -30.51%
• 6M: -54.19%
• 1Y: 7.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ETCG vs. EZET - Expense Ratio Comparison

ETCG has a 2.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EZET's 0.19% expense ratio.

ETCG

Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC)

EZET

Franklin Ethereum ETF

Return for Risk

ETCG vs. EZET — Risk / Return Rank

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

ETCG

ETCG Risk / Return Rank: 2
ETCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
ETCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
ETCG Omega Ratio Rank: 3
ETCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
ETCG Martin Ratio Rank: 2

EZET

EZET Risk / Return Rank: 16
EZET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
EZET Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
EZET Omega Ratio Rank: 20
EZET Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
EZET Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

ETCG vs. EZET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC) (ETCG) and Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET). 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.

	ETCG	EZET	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	0.10	-0.73
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.77	0.72	-1.49
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.08	-0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.66	0.13	-0.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.24	0.25	-1.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ETCG vs. EZET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ETCG Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is lower than the EZET Sharpe Ratio of 0.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ETCG and EZET, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ETCG	EZET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.63	0.10	-0.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.19	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.18	-0.36	+0.17

Correlation

The correlation between ETCG and EZET is 0.71, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

ETCG vs. EZET - Dividend Comparison

Neither ETCG nor EZET has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

ETCG vs. EZET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ETCG drawdown since its inception was -96.59%, which is greater than EZET's maximum drawdown of -64.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ETCG and EZET.

Drawdown Indicators

	ETCG	EZET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.59%	-64.05%	-32.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.57%	-61.68%	-3.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-96.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.26%	-57.40%	-37.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-82.40%	-30.55%	-51.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.94%	30.82%	+4.12%

Volatility

ETCG vs. EZET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust (ETC) (ETCG) is 13.83%, while Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET) has a volatility of 17.39%. This indicates that ETCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ETCG	EZET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.83%	17.39%	-3.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	44.59%	53.47%	-8.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	67.55%	75.78%	-8.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	105.29%	74.84%	+30.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	116.40%	74.84%	+41.56%