PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
USE vs. ISTB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

USE vs. ISTB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) and iShares Core 1-5 Year USD Bond ETF (ISTB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USE achieves a 36.22% return, which is significantly higher than ISTB's 0.75% return.


USE

1D
-3.71%
1M
21.36%
6M
44.67%
YTD
36.22%
1Y
11.10%
3Y*
9.33%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
14.60%

ISTB

1D
0.11%
1M
-0.07%
6M
0.52%
YTD
0.75%
1Y
2.86%
3Y*
4.94%
5Y*
1.87%
10Y*
2.22%
ALL TIME*
2.01%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$21.44M$20.13M$25.36M
$689.79K$334.22K$152.34K

USE vs. ISTB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
USE
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund
36.22%-14.97%22.58%9.68%
ISTB
iShares Core 1-5 Year USD Bond ETF
0.75%6.36%4.37%2.65%

Correlation

The correlation between USE and ISTB is -0.40, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.40

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2023

-0.20

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between USE and ISTB has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.20 to -0.40, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

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

USE vs. ISTB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

USE
USE Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
USE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USE Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
USE Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
USE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
USE Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

ISTB
ISTB Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
ISTB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISTB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISTB Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
ISTB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISTB Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

USE vs. ISTB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) and iShares Core 1-5 Year USD Bond ETF (ISTB). 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.


USEISTBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.30

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.40

2.28

-1.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.74

8.19

-7.45

USE vs. ISTB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USE Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the ISTB Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USE and ISTB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

USE vs. ISTB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USE drawdown since its inception was -28.17%, which is greater than ISTB's maximum drawdown of -9.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USE and ISTB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


USEISTBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.17%

-9.34%

-18.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.17%

-1.26%

-26.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.17%

-1.36%

-26.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-9.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-9.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.46%

-0.16%

-12.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.40%

-1.21%

-7.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.94%

0.35%

+14.59%

Volatility

USE vs. ISTB - Volatility Comparison

USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund (USE) has a higher volatility of 15.88% compared to iShares Core 1-5 Year USD Bond ETF (ISTB) at 0.47%. This indicates that USE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISTB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


USEISTBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.88%

0.47%

+15.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

31.16%

1.42%

+29.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.00%

1.73%

+33.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.60%

2.81%

+25.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.60%

2.51%

+26.09%

USE vs. ISTB - Expense Ratio Comparison

USE has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ISTB's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

USE vs. ISTB - Dividend Comparison

USE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, less than ISTB's 4.28% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ISTB
iShares Core 1-5 Year USD Bond ETF
4.28%4.12%3.83%2.97%2.01%1.69%2.20%2.75%2.57%2.06%1.90%1.58%
USE
USCF Energy Commodity Strategy Absolute Return Fund
2.25%3.06%38.65%4.83%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


USE and ISTB have a correlation of -0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

USE has higher volatility (15.88%) compared to ISTB (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USE dropped -28.17% vs ISTB's -9.34%.

On 3-year performance, USE leads with 9.33% vs 4.94% for ISTB. On fees, ISTB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, ISTB has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, USE has performed better with a 9.33% return vs 4.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ISTB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for USE.

ISTB has the higher dividend yield at 4.28%, compared with 2.25% for USE.

USE is categorized as Commodities, while ISTB is Short-Term Bond. They also come from different issuers: USCF and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for USE and 0.06% for ISTB.

ISTB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.32), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for USE and ISTB

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