ZSL vs. LENS
ZSL (ProShares UltraShort Silver) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZSL is a Silver fund tracking the Bloomberg Silver Subindex (-2x), while LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sarmaya Partners. ZSL is passively managed, while LENS is actively managed. Over the past year, ZSL returned -92.31% vs 61.82% for LENS. At a correlation of -0.78, they often move in opposite directions. ZSL charges 1.32%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.
Performance
ZSL vs. LENS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZSL achieves a -59.81% return, which is significantly lower than LENS's 13.33% return.
ZSL
- 1D
- 5.33%
- 1M
- -6.86%
- YTD
- -59.81%
- 6M
- -75.78%
- 1Y
- -92.31%
- 3Y*
- -69.67%
- 5Y*
- -51.93%
- 10Y*
- -43.74%
LENS
- 1D
- -1.54%
- 1M
- -1.68%
- YTD
- 13.33%
- 6M
- 18.33%
- 1Y
- 61.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZSL vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZSL ProShares UltraShort Silver | -59.81% | -85.15% |
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 13.33% | 56.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZSL and LENS is -0.81, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025 | -0.78 |
The correlation between ZSL and LENS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.81 to -0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ZSL vs. LENS — Risk / Return Rank
ZSL
LENS
ZSL vs. LENS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Silver (ZSL) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). 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.
| ZSL | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.77 | 2.34 | -3.11 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.38 | 2.70 | -5.08 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.74 | 1.41 | -0.66 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.98 | 4.02 | -4.99 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.35 | 10.02 | -11.37 |
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
| ZSL | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.77 | 2.34 | -3.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.70 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.67 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.67 | 2.09 | -2.76 |
Drawdowns
ZSL vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZSL drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than LENS's maximum drawdown of -15.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZSL and LENS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZSL | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -100.00% | -15.47% | -84.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -94.55% | -15.47% | -79.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -98.40% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -99.06% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -99.82% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -100.00% | -13.64% | -86.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -96.39% | -3.71% | -92.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 68.23% | 6.19% | +62.04% |
Volatility
ZSL vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort Silver (ZSL) has a higher volatility of 32.31% compared to Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) at 6.16%. This indicates that ZSL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LENS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZSL | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 32.31% | 6.16% | +26.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 105.86% | 22.07% | +83.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 119.48% | 26.54% | +92.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 74.07% | 25.49% | +48.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 65.20% | 25.49% | +39.71% |
ZSL vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZSL has a 1.32% expense ratio, which is higher than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZSL vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison
ZSL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 1.41% | 1.60% |
ZSL ProShares UltraShort Silver | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZSL and LENS have a correlation of -0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ZSL has higher volatility (32.31%) compared to LENS (6.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZSL dropped -100.00% vs LENS's -15.47%.
On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 61.82% vs -92.31% for ZSL. On fees, LENS is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 6.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 61.82% return vs -92.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LENS is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.32% for ZSL.
LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.00% for ZSL.
ZSL is categorized as Silver, while LENS is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Sarmaya Partners. Their fees differ too: 1.32% for ZSL and 0.79% for LENS.
LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs -0.77), 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.
Find the right allocation for ZSL and LENS
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