ZSC vs. CTWO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ZSC (USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund) and CTWO (COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust) are both Commodities funds. Over the past year, ZSC returned 30.50% vs 1.48% for CTWO. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZSC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for CTWO.

Performance

ZSC vs. CTWO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) and COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust (CTWO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZSC achieves a 5.64% return, which is significantly higher than CTWO's -13.60% return.

ZSC

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

CTWO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.18%
• YTD: -13.60%
• 6M: -12.94%
• 1Y: 1.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ZSC vs. CTWO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	5.64%	20.36%
CTWO COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust	-13.60%	4.42%

Correlation

The correlation between ZSC and CTWO is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2025	0.25

Return for Risk

ZSC vs. CTWO — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

CTWO

CTWO Risk / Return Rank: 10
CTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
CTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
CTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 10
CTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
CTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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. CTWO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) and COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust (CTWO). 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.

	ZSC	CTWO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	0.05	+2.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.15	0.26	+2.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.04	+0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.99	0.05	+3.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.17	0.10	+11.07

ZSC vs. CTWO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZSC Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is higher than the CTWO Sharpe Ratio of 0.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZSC and CTWO, 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

ZSC vs. CTWO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZSC drawdown since its inception was -26.49%, smaller than the maximum CTWO drawdown of -30.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSC and CTWO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZSC	CTWO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.49%	-30.13%	+3.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.69%	-30.13%	+22.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.12%	-23.44%	+17.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.55%	-12.57%	-1.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	14.60%	-11.86%

Volatility

ZSC vs. CTWO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund (ZSC) is 3.16%, while COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust (CTWO) has a volatility of 8.27%. This indicates that ZSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTWO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZSC	CTWO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.16%	8.27%	-5.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.45%	24.34%	-14.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.78%	27.61%	-14.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.24%	29.25%	-17.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.24%	29.25%	-17.01%

ZSC vs. CTWO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZSC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CTWO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZSC vs. CTWO - Dividend Comparison

ZSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%, while CTWO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CTWO COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZSC USCF Sustainable Commodity Strategy Fund	1.65%	1.75%	2.18%	1.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZSC and CTWO in my portfolio?

ZSC and CTWO have a correlation of 0.23, 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 CTWO?

CTWO has higher volatility (8.27%) compared to ZSC (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZSC dropped -26.49% vs CTWO's -30.13%.

Which ETF is better, ZSC or CTWO?

On 1-year performance, ZSC leads with 30.50% vs 1.48% for CTWO. On fees, ZSC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. 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, ZSC or CTWO?

Over the 1-year period, ZSC has performed better with a 30.50% return vs 1.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZSC or CTWO?

ZSC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for CTWO.

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

ZSC has the higher dividend yield at 1.65%, compared with 0.00% for CTWO.

What is the main difference between ZSC and CTWO?

They also come from different issuers: USCF and COtwo Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for ZSC and 0.79% for CTWO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 0.05), 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.