GSG vs. ZSB
GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) and ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index, while ZSB is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GSG returned 15.01%/yr vs -0.16%/yr for ZSB. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GSG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ZSB.
Performance
GSG vs. ZSB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSG achieves a 34.43% return, which is significantly higher than ZSB's 4.29% return.
GSG
- 1D
- 1.57%
- 1M
- 1.37%
- 6M
- 28.74%
- YTD
- 34.43%
- 1Y
- 38.08%
- 3Y*
- 15.01%
- 5Y*
- 14.34%
- 10Y*
- 7.57%
ZSB
- 1D
- 0.66%
- 1M
- -4.06%
- 6M
- -8.61%
- YTD
- 4.29%
- 1Y
- 58.26%
- 3Y*
- -0.16%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG vs. ZSB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 34.43% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -0.74% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 4.29% | 64.34% | -19.70% | -31.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSG and ZSB is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2023 | 0.20 |
The correlation between GSG and ZSB shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (1 year) to 0.21 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
GSG vs. ZSB — Risk / Return Rank
GSG
ZSB
GSG vs. ZSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) 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.
| GSG | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.41 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.03 | 3.50 | -1.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.88 | 8.38 | -1.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GSG vs. ZSB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSG drawdown since its inception was -89.62%, which is greater than ZSB's maximum drawdown of -49.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSG and ZSB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSG | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.62% | -49.26% | -40.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.81% | -16.75% | -2.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.81% | -43.22% | +24.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.12% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.64% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -59.41% | -12.07% | -47.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -63.69% | -30.30% | -33.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.55% | 6.97% | -1.42% |
Volatility
GSG vs. ZSB - Volatility Comparison
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) at 5.06%. This indicates that GSG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZSB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GSG | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.37% | 5.06% | +2.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.54% | 21.55% | -0.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.48% | 26.57% | -3.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.80% | 19.56% | +3.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.00% | 19.56% | +2.44% |
GSG vs. ZSB - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSB's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSG vs. ZSB - Dividend Comparison
GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 0.88% | 0.92% | 2.96% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GSG and ZSB have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to ZSB (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSG dropped -89.62% vs ZSB's -49.26%.
On 3-year performance, GSG leads with 15.01% vs -0.16% for ZSB. On fees, ZSB is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ZSB has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GSG has performed better with a 15.01% return vs -0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ZSB is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
ZSB has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
GSG is categorized as Commodities, while ZSB is Lithium & Battery Metals. GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index, while ZSB tracks S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GSG and 0.59% for ZSB.
ZSB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.63), 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.
Find the right allocation for GSG and ZSB
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer