BILT vs. ZAP

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

BILT (iShares Infrastructure Active ETF) and ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BILT is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by iShares, while ZAP is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the Global X U.S. Electrification Index. BILT is actively managed, while ZAP is passively managed. Over the past year, BILT returned 17.98% vs 16.64% for ZAP. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BILT charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for ZAP.

Performance

BILT vs. ZAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) and Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BILT achieves a 14.30% return, which is significantly higher than ZAP's 12.73% return.

BILT

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -1.05%
• 6M: 8.99%
• YTD: 14.30%
• 1Y: 17.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.07%

ZAP

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: -4.53%
• 6M: 6.56%
• YTD: 12.73%
• 1Y: 16.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 22.66%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	$2.38M	$1.70M	$1.65M
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	$2.44M	$2.69M	$3.82M

BILT vs. ZAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	14.30%	4.16%
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	12.73%	3.75%

Correlation

The correlation between BILT and ZAP is 0.60, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025	0.60

The correlation between BILT and ZAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BILT vs. ZAP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BILT

BILT Risk / Return Rank: 81
BILT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BILT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BILT Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BILT Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
BILT Martin Ratio Rank: 81

ZAP

ZAP Risk / Return Rank: 44
ZAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
ZAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
ZAP Omega Ratio Rank: 37
ZAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
ZAP Martin Ratio Rank: 45

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BILT vs. ZAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) and Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP). 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.

	BILT	ZAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	1.02	+0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.56	1.48	+1.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.18	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.52	1.97	+1.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.60	5.01	+5.59

BILT vs. ZAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BILT Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is higher than the ZAP Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BILT and ZAP, 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

BILT vs. ZAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BILT drawdown since its inception was -5.38%, smaller than the maximum ZAP drawdown of -12.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BILT and ZAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BILT	ZAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.38%	-12.38%	+7.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.38%	-8.18%	+2.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.25%	-6.77%	+4.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.36%	-2.65%	+1.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.78%	3.22%	-1.44%

Volatility

BILT vs. ZAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) is 3.10%, while Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that BILT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BILT	ZAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.10%	4.72%	-1.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.44%	12.63%	-4.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.31%	15.88%	-5.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.31%	16.91%	-6.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.31%	16.91%	-6.60%

BILT vs. ZAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BILT has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ZAP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BILT vs. ZAP - Dividend Comparison

BILT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.70%, more than ZAP's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	5.70%	0.99%	0.00%
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	1.67%	1.81%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BILT and ZAP in my portfolio?

BILT and ZAP have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BILT or ZAP?

ZAP has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to BILT (3.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BILT dropped -5.38% vs ZAP's -12.38%.

Which ETF is better, BILT or ZAP?

On 1-year performance, BILT leads with 17.98% vs 16.64% for ZAP. On fees, ZAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BILT has been the lower-risk option at 3.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BILT or ZAP?

Over the 1-year period, BILT has performed better with a 17.98% return vs 16.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BILT or ZAP?

ZAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BILT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BILT or ZAP?

BILT has the higher dividend yield at 5.70%, compared with 1.67% for ZAP.

What is the main difference between BILT and ZAP?

BILT is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while ZAP is Utilities Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BILT and 0.50% for ZAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.02), 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.