ZCSH vs. BFAP

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ZCSH (Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)) and BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) are both Cryptocurrency funds. ZCSH is passively managed, while BFAP is actively managed. Over the past year, ZCSH returned 872.41% vs -29.32% for BFAP. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZCSH charges 2.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BFAP.

Performance

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZCSH achieves a 22.17% return, which is significantly higher than BFAP's -21.16% return.

ZCSH

• 1D: -3.72%
• 1M: 21.32%
• 6M: 34.21%
• YTD: 22.17%
• 1Y: 872.41%
• 3Y*: 147.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BFAP

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: -0.59%
• 6M: -26.27%
• YTD: -21.16%
• 1Y: -29.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZCSH Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)	22.17%	984.14%
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	-21.16%	8.90%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCSH and BFAP is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	0.48

Return for Risk

ZCSH vs. BFAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZCSH

ZCSH Risk / Return Rank: 95
ZCSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
ZCSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
ZCSH Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ZCSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ZCSH Martin Ratio Rank: 95

BFAP

BFAP Risk / Return Rank: 1
BFAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
BFAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Omega Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BFAP Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP). 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.

	ZCSH	BFAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.04	-1.37	+6.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	-1.94	+5.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	0.77	+0.68
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	12.66	-0.86	+13.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.13	-1.46	+24.59

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZCSH Sharpe Ratio is 5.04, which is higher than the BFAP Sharpe Ratio of -1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZCSH and BFAP, 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

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCSH drawdown since its inception was -93.73%, which is greater than BFAP's maximum drawdown of -34.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCSH and BFAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZCSH	BFAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.73%	-34.15%	-59.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-69.62%	-34.15%	-35.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-71.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.13%	-31.48%	+4.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-73.53%	-12.68%	-60.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	38.03%	20.14%	+17.89%

Volatility

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Volatility Comparison

Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC) (ZCSH) has a higher volatility of 32.97% compared to FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) at 4.52%. This indicates that ZCSH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BFAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZCSH	BFAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	32.97%	4.52%	+28.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	107.08%	16.29%	+90.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	174.80%	21.50%	+153.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	137.97%	20.25%	+117.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	137.97%	20.25%	+117.72%

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZCSH has a 2.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BFAP's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZCSH vs. BFAP - Dividend Comparison

ZCSH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.06%.

Position	TTM	2025
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	24.06%	18.97%
ZCSH Grayscale Zcash Trust (ZEC)	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZCSH and BFAP in my portfolio?

ZCSH and BFAP have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ZCSH or BFAP?

ZCSH has higher volatility (32.97%) compared to BFAP (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZCSH dropped -93.73% vs BFAP's -34.15%.

Which ETF is better, ZCSH or BFAP?

On 1-year performance, ZCSH leads with 872.41% vs -29.32% for BFAP. On fees, BFAP is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, BFAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZCSH or BFAP?

Over the 1-year period, ZCSH has performed better with a 872.41% return vs -29.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZCSH or BFAP?

BFAP is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 2.50% for ZCSH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZCSH or BFAP?

BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 24.06%, compared with 0.00% for ZCSH.

What is the main difference between ZCSH and BFAP?

They also come from different issuers: Grayscale and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 2.50% for ZCSH and 0.90% for BFAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZCSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.04 vs -1.37), 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.