ZSB vs. LLII
ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) and LLII (REX LLY Growth & Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZSB is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index, while LLII is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by REX. ZSB is passively managed, while LLII is actively managed. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZSB charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for LLII.
Performance
ZSB vs. LLII - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZSB achieves a 11.80% return, which is significantly higher than LLII's -4.28% return.
ZSB
- 1D
- -1.94%
- 1M
- 1.21%
- YTD
- 11.80%
- 6M
- 25.71%
- 1Y
- 75.67%
- 3Y*
- 5.94%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LLII
- 1D
- 1.47%
- 1M
- 9.79%
- YTD
- -4.28%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZSB vs. LLII - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 11.80% | 17.42% |
LLII REX LLY Growth & Income ETF | -4.28% | 19.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZSB and LLII is 0.06, 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 Nov 5, 2025 | 0.06 |
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. LLII — Risk / Return Rank
ZSB
LLII
ZSB vs. LLII - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) and REX LLY Growth & Income ETF (LLII). 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 | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.54 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.79 | — | — |
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 | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.88 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.02 | 0.71 | -0.69 |
Drawdowns
ZSB vs. LLII - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZSB drawdown since its inception was -49.26%, which is greater than LLII's maximum drawdown of -23.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSB and LLII.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZSB | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.26% | -23.96% | -25.30% |
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 | -5.74% | -6.88% | +1.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.95% | -9.28% | -21.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.93% | — | — |
Volatility
ZSB vs. LLII - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZSB | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.71% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.65% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.40% | 36.42% | -10.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.62% | 36.42% | -16.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.62% | 36.42% | -16.80% |
ZSB vs. LLII - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZSB has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than LLII's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZSB vs. LLII - Dividend Comparison
ZSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than LLII's 25.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LLII REX LLY Growth & Income ETF | 25.95% | 5.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund | 0.82% | 0.92% | 2.96% | 3.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZSB and LLII have a correlation of 0.06, 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 0.99% for LLII.
LLII has the higher dividend yield at 25.95%, compared with 0.82% for ZSB.
ZSB is categorized as Commodities, while LLII is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: USCF and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ZSB and 0.99% for LLII.
Find the right allocation for ZSB and LLII
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