ZSB vs. ZSC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ZSB (USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund) and ZSC (USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ZSB is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P GSCI Electric Vehicle Meals Index, while ZSC is a Commodities fund actively managed by USCF. ZSB is passively managed, while ZSC is actively managed. Over the past year, ZSB returned 59.70% vs 30.50% for ZSC. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.59% expense ratio.

Performance

ZSB vs. ZSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) and USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZSB achieves a 4.41% return, which is significantly lower than ZSC's 5.64% return.

ZSB

• 1D: -2.97%
• 1M: -7.84%
• YTD: 4.41%
• 6M: 6.25%
• 1Y: 59.70%
• 3Y*: 1.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZSC

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: -4.02%
• YTD: 5.64%
• 6M: 6.63%
• 1Y: 30.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ZSB vs. ZSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	4.41%	64.34%	-19.70%	-19.69%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	5.64%	28.43%	-14.39%	-10.63%

Correlation

The correlation between ZSB and ZSC is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2023	0.62

The correlation between ZSB and ZSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ZSB vs. ZSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZSB

ZSB Risk / Return Rank: 71
ZSB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
ZSB Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
ZSB Omega Ratio Rank: 78
ZSB Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
ZSB Martin Ratio Rank: 59

ZSC

ZSC Risk / Return Rank: 78
ZSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ZSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
ZSC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
ZSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ZSC Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

ZSB vs. ZSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) and USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC). 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.

	ZSB	ZSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	2.40	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	3.15	-0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.46	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.58	3.99	-0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.56	11.17	-1.61

ZSB vs. ZSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZSB Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is comparable to the ZSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZSB and ZSC, 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

ZSB vs. ZSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZSB drawdown since its inception was -49.26%, which is greater than ZSC's maximum drawdown of -26.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSB and ZSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZSB	ZSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.26%	-26.49%	-22.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.75%	-7.69%	-9.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.97%	-6.12%	-5.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.58%	-14.55%	-16.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.27%	2.74%	+3.53%

Volatility

ZSB vs. ZSC - Volatility Comparison

USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund (ZSB) has a higher volatility of 5.63% compared to USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) at 3.16%. This indicates that ZSB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZSB	ZSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	3.16%	+2.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.46%	9.45%	+13.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.67%	12.78%	+13.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.62%	12.24%	+7.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.62%	12.24%	+7.38%

ZSB vs. ZSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ZSB and ZSC have an expense ratio of 0.59%.

Dividends

ZSB vs. ZSC - Dividend Comparison

ZSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than ZSC's 1.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ZSB USCF Sustainable Battery Metals Strategy Fund	0.88%	0.92%	2.96%	3.59%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	1.65%	1.75%	2.18%	1.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZSB and ZSC in my portfolio?

ZSB and ZSC have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ZSB or ZSC?

ZSB has higher volatility (5.63%) compared to ZSC (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZSB dropped -49.26% vs ZSC's -26.49%.

Which ETF is better, ZSB or ZSC?

On 1-year performance, ZSB leads with 59.70% vs 30.50% for ZSC. Both ETFs have the same 0.59% expense ratio. On volatility, ZSC has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZSB or ZSC?

Over the 1-year period, ZSB has performed better with a 59.70% return vs 30.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZSB or ZSC?

ZSB and ZSC have the same expense ratio: 0.59% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZSB or ZSC?

ZSC has the higher dividend yield at 1.65%, compared with 0.88% for ZSB.

What is the main difference between ZSB and ZSC?

ZSB is categorized as Lithium & Battery Metals, while ZSC is Commodities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.26), 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.