ZIVB vs. SMST.L
ZIVB (-1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF) and SMST.L (Leverage Shares -3x Short MicroStrategy ETP) are both Inverse Equities funds. ZIVB charges 1.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for SMST.L.
Performance
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ZIVB is traded in USD, while SMST.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the SMST.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
ZIVB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SMST.L
- 1D
- 5.12%
- 1M
- 142.59%
- YTD
- -67.82%
- 6M
- -49.40%
- 1Y
- 54.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ZIVB -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF | 0.00% |
SMST.L Leverage Shares -3x Short MicroStrategy ETP | 32.35% |
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
ZIVB vs. SMST.L — Risk / Return Rank
ZIVB
SMST.L
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for -1x Short VIX Mid-Term Futures Strategy ETF (ZIVB) and Leverage Shares -3x Short MicroStrategy ETP (SMST.L). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZIVB | SMST.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 0.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | — | -0.00 | — |
Drawdowns
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZIVB drawdown since its inception was 0.00%, smaller than the maximum SMST.L drawdown of -99.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZIVB and SMST.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZIVB | SMST.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -99.31% | +99.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -93.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -91.45% | +91.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -80.05% | +80.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 47.99% | — |
Volatility
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZIVB | SMST.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 55.76% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 176.52% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.00% | 202.53% | -202.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 19,018.54% | -19,018.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 19,018.54% | -19,018.54% |
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZIVB has a 1.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SMST.L's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZIVB vs. SMST.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ZIVB nor SMST.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, SMST.L is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SMST.L is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for ZIVB.
They also come from different issuers: Volatility Shares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.35% for ZIVB and 0.75% for SMST.L.
Find the right allocation for ZIVB and SMST.L
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