GRN vs. ZSC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) and USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC).

GRN and ZSC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GRN is a passively managed fund by Barclays Capital that tracks the performance of the Barclays Global Carbon II Index. It was launched on Sep 10, 2019. ZSC is an actively managed fund by USCF. It was launched on Aug 8, 2023.

Performance

GRN vs. ZSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) and USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GRN vs. ZSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GRN iPath Series B Carbon ETN	-16.12%	20.33%	-7.34%	-7.70%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	4.85%	28.43%	-14.39%	-10.63%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GRN achieves a -16.12% return, which is significantly lower than ZSC's 4.85% return.

GRN

• 1D: 1.04%
• 1M: 4.57%
• YTD: -16.12%
• 6M: -4.84%
• 1Y: 7.43%
• 3Y*: -7.04%
• 5Y*: 11.37%
• 10Y*: —

ZSC

• 1D: 0.44%
• 1M: 1.03%
• YTD: 4.85%
• 6M: 17.52%
• 1Y: 30.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GRN vs. ZSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSC's 0.59% expense ratio.

GRN

iPath Series B Carbon ETN

ZSC

USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund

Return for Risk

GRN vs. ZSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRN

GRN Risk / Return Rank: 19
GRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
GRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
GRN Omega Ratio Rank: 20
GRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
GRN Martin Ratio Rank: 17

ZSC

ZSC Risk / Return Rank: 93
ZSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
ZSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
ZSC Omega Ratio Rank: 93
ZSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
ZSC Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

GRN vs. ZSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) and USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC). 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.

	GRN	ZSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.25	2.27	-2.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.55	2.95	-2.40
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.43	-0.36
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.22	4.05	-3.83
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.71	12.11	-11.40
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GRN vs. ZSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRN Sharpe Ratio is 0.25, which is lower than the ZSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRN and ZSC, 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

	GRN	ZSC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25	2.27	-2.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	0.09	+0.29

Correlation

The correlation between GRN and ZSC is 0.28, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

GRN vs. ZSC - Dividend Comparison

GRN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GRN iPath Series B Carbon ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	1.67%	1.75%	2.18%	1.40%

Drawdowns

GRN vs. ZSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRN drawdown since its inception was -47.96%, which is greater than ZSC's maximum drawdown of -26.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRN and ZSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GRN	ZSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.96%	-26.49%	-21.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.39%	-7.69%	-22.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.34%	-2.33%	-24.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.38%	-15.63%	-1.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.46%	2.57%	+6.89%

Volatility

GRN vs. ZSC - Volatility Comparison

iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) has a higher volatility of 13.05% compared to USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) at 3.98%. This indicates that GRN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GRN	ZSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.05%	3.98%	+9.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.68%	10.59%	+13.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.63%	13.56%	+16.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.22%	12.42%	+27.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.32%	12.42%	+29.90%