UGA vs. ZSB
UGA (United States Gasoline Fund, LP) and ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - UGA is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Near-Month NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract, 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, UGA returned 14.87%/yr vs 2.49%/yr for ZSB. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. UGA charges 1.02%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ZSB.
Performance
UGA vs. ZSB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UGA achieves a 72.77% return, which is significantly higher than ZSB's 3.20% return.
UGA
- 1D
- -0.56%
- 1M
- 0.07%
- 6M
- 54.03%
- YTD
- 72.77%
- 1Y
- 71.49%
- 3Y*
- 14.87%
- 5Y*
- 24.07%
- 10Y*
- 16.28%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.25%
ZSB
- 1D
- 0.60%
- 1M
- -1.18%
- 6M
- -2.72%
- YTD
- 3.20%
- 1Y
- 53.71%
- 3Y*
- 2.49%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -1.88%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.67M | $6.11M | $4.99M | |
| $2.44K | $4.43K | $9.33K |
UGA vs. ZSB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
UGA United States Gasoline Fund, LP | 72.77% | -2.00% | 3.77% | 8.37% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 3.20% | 64.34% | -19.70% | -31.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between UGA and ZSB is -0.03, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2023 | 0.09 |
The correlation between UGA and ZSB shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.09 (all time), 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
UGA vs. ZSB — Risk / Return Rank
UGA
ZSB
UGA vs. ZSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States Gasoline Fund, LP (UGA) 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.
| UGA | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.39 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.54 | 3.22 | +0.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.75 | 7.12 | +2.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UGA vs. ZSB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UGA drawdown since its inception was -86.59%, which is greater than ZSB's maximum drawdown of -49.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UGA and ZSB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UGA | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.59% | -49.26% | -37.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -20.32% | -16.75% | -3.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.68% | -37.33% | +10.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -75.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.67% | -12.99% | -1.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -36.52% | -29.99% | -6.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.36% | 7.57% | -0.21% |
Volatility
UGA vs. ZSB - Volatility Comparison
United States Gasoline Fund, LP (UGA) has a higher volatility of 13.00% compared to USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) at 3.34%. This indicates that UGA'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
| UGA | ZSB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.00% | 3.34% | +9.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.16% | 17.93% | +14.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.60% | 26.10% | +10.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.71% | 19.45% | +15.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.31% | 19.45% | +17.86% |
UGA vs. ZSB - Expense Ratio Comparison
UGA has a 1.02% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSB's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
UGA vs. ZSB - Dividend Comparison
UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
UGA United States Gasoline Fund, LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 0.89% | 0.92% | 2.96% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UGA and ZSB have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UGA has higher volatility (13.00%) compared to ZSB (3.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UGA dropped -86.59% vs ZSB's -49.26%.
On 3-year performance, UGA leads with 14.87% vs 2.49% for ZSB. On fees, ZSB is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ZSB has been the lower-risk option at 3.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, UGA has performed better with a 14.87% return vs 2.49%. 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 1.02% for UGA.
ZSB has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.
UGA is categorized as Oil & Gas, while ZSB is Lithium & Battery Metals. UGA tracks Near-Month NYMEX RBOB Gasoline Futures Contract, while ZSB tracks S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index. Their fees differ too: 1.02% for UGA and 0.59% for ZSB.
ZSB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.96), 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 UGA 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