UTES vs. ZAP

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

UTES (Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF) and ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds. UTES is actively managed, while ZAP is passively managed. Over the past year, UTES returned -2.59% vs 17.43% for ZAP. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. UTES charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for ZAP.

Performance

UTES vs. ZAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) 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, UTES achieves a 0.36% return, which is significantly lower than ZAP's 13.49% return.

UTES

• 1D: 1.44%
• 1M: -2.90%
• 6M: 3.82%
• YTD: 0.36%
• 1Y: -2.59%
• 3Y*: 22.82%
• 5Y*: 14.89%
• 10Y*: 12.14%
• ALL TIME*: 13.64%

ZAP

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -3.89%
• 6M: 8.10%
• YTD: 13.49%
• 1Y: 17.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 23.04%

*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)
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	$11.31M	$10.12M	$13.80M
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	$2.50M	$2.72M	$3.82M

UTES vs. ZAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	0.36%	25.71%	-1.06%
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	13.49%	21.84%	1.26%

Correlation

The correlation between UTES and ZAP is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2024	0.84

The correlation between UTES and ZAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UTES vs. ZAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

UTES

UTES Risk / Return Rank: 9
UTES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
UTES Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
UTES Omega Ratio Rank: 9
UTES Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
UTES Martin Ratio Rank: 8

ZAP

ZAP Risk / Return Rank: 46
ZAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ZAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ZAP Omega Ratio Rank: 39
ZAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
ZAP Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

UTES vs. ZAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) 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.

	UTES	ZAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.12	1.10	-1.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.02	1.59	-1.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.19	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.19	2.14	-2.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.39	5.39	-5.78

UTES vs. ZAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UTES Sharpe Ratio is -0.12, which is lower than the ZAP Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UTES 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

UTES vs. ZAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UTES drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, which is greater than ZAP's maximum drawdown of -12.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UTES and ZAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	UTES	ZAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.39%	-12.38%	-23.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.88%	-8.18%	-5.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.40%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.00%	-6.14%	-2.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.54%	-2.66%	-2.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.74%	3.24%	+3.50%

Volatility

UTES vs. ZAP - Volatility Comparison

Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) has a higher volatility of 5.50% compared to Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) at 4.70%. This indicates that UTES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UTES	ZAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.50%	4.70%	+0.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.23%	12.62%	+3.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.46%	15.90%	+5.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.75%	16.90%	+3.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.27%	16.90%	+3.37%

UTES vs. ZAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

UTES has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than ZAP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

UTES vs. ZAP - Dividend Comparison

UTES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than ZAP's 1.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	1.51%	1.42%	1.51%	2.44%	2.13%	1.94%	2.09%	1.84%	2.09%	3.44%	3.53%	0.61%
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	1.66%	1.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UTES and ZAP in my portfolio?

UTES and ZAP have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UTES or ZAP?

UTES has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to ZAP (4.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UTES dropped -35.39% vs ZAP's -12.38%.

Which ETF is better, UTES or ZAP?

On 1-year performance, ZAP leads with 17.43% vs -2.59% for UTES. On fees, UTES is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, ZAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UTES or ZAP?

Over the 1-year period, ZAP has performed better with a 17.43% return vs -2.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UTES or ZAP?

UTES is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for ZAP.

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

ZAP has the higher dividend yield at 1.66%, compared with 1.51% for UTES.

What is the main difference between UTES and ZAP?

They also come from different issuers: Virtus and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for UTES and 0.50% for ZAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.10 vs -0.12), 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.