ZSC vs. CMDY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZSC (USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund) and CMDY (iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF) are both Commodities funds. ZSC is actively managed, while CMDY is passively managed. Over the past year, ZSC returned 36.39% vs 37.10% for CMDY. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZSC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for CMDY.

Performance

ZSC vs. CMDY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZSC achieves a 9.47% return, which is significantly lower than CMDY's 25.44% return.

ZSC

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 9.47%
• 6M: 15.02%
• 1Y: 36.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CMDY

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -2.52%
• YTD: 25.44%
• 6M: 24.53%
• 1Y: 37.10%
• 3Y*: 15.48%
• 5Y*: 10.71%
• 10Y*: —

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

ZSC vs. CMDY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	9.47%	28.43%	-14.39%	-10.63%
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF	25.44%	15.81%	5.43%	-4.86%

Correlation

The correlation between ZSC and CMDY is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 10, 2023	0.33

ZSC vs. CMDY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ZSC	CMDY
Technology	42.0%	-
Industrials	33.2%	-
Utilities	24.8%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ZSC vs. CMDY — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZSC

ZSC Risk / Return Rank: 84
ZSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
ZSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ZSC Omega Ratio Rank: 87
ZSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
ZSC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

CMDY

CMDY Risk / Return Rank: 72
CMDY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
CMDY Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CMDY Omega Ratio Rank: 69
CMDY Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
CMDY Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

ZSC vs. CMDY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). 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.

	ZSC	CMDY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.88	2.32	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	2.93	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.42	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.76	4.82	-0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.69	14.50	+0.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZSC vs. CMDY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZSC Sharpe Ratio is 2.88, which is comparable to the CMDY Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZSC and CMDY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZSC	CMDY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.88	2.32	+0.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.56	-0.34

Drawdowns

ZSC vs. CMDY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZSC drawdown since its inception was -26.49%, smaller than the maximum CMDY drawdown of -31.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSC and CMDY.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZSC	CMDY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.49%	-31.19%	+4.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.69%	-7.73%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.71%	-3.97%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.74%	-13.14%	-1.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.48%	2.57%	-0.09%

Volatility

ZSC vs. CMDY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) is 3.19%, while iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY) has a volatility of 5.04%. This indicates that ZSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZSC	CMDY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	5.04%	-1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.09%	14.20%	-5.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.70%	16.06%	-3.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.24%	15.80%	-3.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.24%	14.63%	-2.39%

ZSC vs. CMDY - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZSC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDY's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZSC vs. CMDY - Dividend Comparison

ZSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, less than CMDY's 10.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CMDY iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF	10.28%	12.89%	4.23%	5.10%	3.98%	16.09%	0.15%	2.21%	1.73%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	1.60%	1.75%	2.18%	1.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZSC and CMDY in my portfolio?

ZSC and CMDY have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ZSC or CMDY?

CMDY has higher volatility (5.04%) compared to ZSC (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZSC dropped -26.49% vs CMDY's -31.19%.

Which ETF is better, ZSC or CMDY?

On 1-year performance, CMDY leads with 37.10% vs 36.39% for ZSC. On fees, CMDY is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, ZSC has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZSC or CMDY?

Over the 1-year period, CMDY has performed better with a 37.10% return vs 36.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZSC or CMDY?

CMDY is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for ZSC.

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

CMDY has the higher dividend yield at 10.28%, compared with 1.60% for ZSC.

What is the main difference between ZSC and CMDY?

They also come from different issuers: USCF and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ZSC and 0.28% for CMDY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.88 vs 2.32), 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.