HARD vs. ZSB

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

HARD (Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF) and ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - HARD is a Commodities fund actively managed by Simplify, while ZSB is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index. HARD is actively managed, while ZSB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, HARD returned 11.43%/yr vs -0.16%/yr for ZSB. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HARD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ZSB.

Performance

HARD vs. ZSB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) 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, HARD achieves a 7.04% return, which is significantly higher than ZSB's 4.29% return.

HARD

• 1D: 1.24%
• 1M: -1.46%
• 6M: 3.87%
• YTD: 7.04%
• 1Y: 11.60%
• 3Y*: 11.43%
• 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)

HARD vs. ZSB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HARD Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	7.04%	12.19%	20.48%	-5.04%
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	4.29%	64.34%	-19.70%	-27.47%

Correlation

The correlation between HARD and ZSB is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2023	0.23

Return for Risk

HARD vs. ZSB — Risk / Return Rank

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

HARD

HARD Risk / Return Rank: 17
HARD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
HARD Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
HARD Omega Ratio Rank: 17
HARD Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
HARD Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

HARD vs. ZSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) 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.

	HARD	ZSB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.44	2.21	-1.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.74	2.67	-1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.41	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.56	3.50	-2.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.49	8.38	-6.89

HARD vs. ZSB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HARD Sharpe Ratio is 0.44, which is lower than the ZSB Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HARD 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

HARD vs. ZSB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HARD drawdown since its inception was -20.81%, smaller than the maximum ZSB drawdown of -49.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HARD and ZSB.

Drawdown Indicators

	HARD	ZSB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.81%	-49.26%	+28.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.81%	-16.75%	-4.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.81%	-43.22%	+22.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.44%	-12.07%	-4.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.86%	-30.30%	+24.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.79%	6.97%	+0.82%

Volatility

HARD vs. ZSB - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) and USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) have volatilities of 5.23% and 5.06%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HARD	ZSB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.23%	5.06%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.71%	21.55%	+0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.32%	26.57%	-0.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.05%	19.56%	-0.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.05%	19.56%	-0.51%

HARD vs. ZSB - Expense Ratio Comparison

HARD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSB's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

HARD vs. ZSB - Dividend Comparison

HARD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.99%, more than ZSB's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
HARD Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	2.99%	2.36%	3.51%	1.95%
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	0.88%	0.92%	2.96%	3.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HARD and ZSB in my portfolio?

HARD and ZSB have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HARD or ZSB?

HARD has higher volatility (5.23%) compared to ZSB (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HARD dropped -20.81% vs ZSB's -49.26%.

Which ETF is better, HARD or ZSB?

On 3-year performance, HARD leads with 11.43% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, HARD or ZSB?

Over the 3-year period, HARD has performed better with a 11.43% return vs -0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HARD or ZSB?

ZSB is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for HARD.

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

HARD has the higher dividend yield at 2.99%, compared with 0.88% for ZSB.

What is the main difference between HARD and ZSB?

HARD is categorized as Commodities, while ZSB is Lithium & Battery Metals. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for HARD and 0.59% for ZSB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZSB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 0.44), 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.