ZSB vs. BESF
ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) and BESF (Bastion Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZSB is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index, while BESF is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Bastion. ZSB is passively managed, while BESF is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. ZSB charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for BESF.
Performance
ZSB vs. BESF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZSB achieves a 14.02% return, which is significantly lower than BESF's 18.93% return.
ZSB
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- 2.34%
- YTD
- 14.02%
- 6M
- 28.85%
- 1Y
- 78.36%
- 3Y*
- 6.63%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BESF
- 1D
- 1.00%
- 1M
- -2.84%
- YTD
- 18.93%
- 6M
- 21.99%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZSB vs. BESF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 14.02% | 55.63% |
BESF Bastion Energy ETF | 18.93% | 41.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZSB and BESF is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025 | -0.07 |
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
ZSB vs. BESF — Risk / Return Rank
ZSB
BESF
ZSB vs. BESF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) and Bastion Energy ETF (BESF). 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.
| ZSB | BESF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.99 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.38 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.77 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.48 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZSB | BESF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.99 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.05 | 2.83 | -2.78 |
Drawdowns
ZSB vs. BESF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZSB drawdown since its inception was -49.26%, which is greater than BESF's maximum drawdown of -9.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSB and BESF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZSB | BESF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.26% | -9.89% | -39.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.22% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.87% | -6.52% | +2.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.98% | -2.43% | -28.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.92% | — | — |
Volatility
ZSB vs. BESF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZSB | BESF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.39% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.64% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.31% | 24.37% | +1.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.60% | 24.37% | -4.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.60% | 24.37% | -4.77% |
ZSB vs. BESF - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZSB has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than BESF's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZSB vs. BESF - Dividend Comparison
ZSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, less than BESF's 5.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BESF Bastion Energy ETF | 5.72% | 6.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 0.81% | 0.92% | 2.96% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZSB and BESF have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZSB is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZSB is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BESF.
BESF has the higher dividend yield at 5.72%, compared with 0.81% for ZSB.
ZSB is categorized as Commodities, while BESF is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: USCF and Bastion. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ZSB and 0.80% for BESF.
Find the right allocation for ZSB and BESF
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