ZAP vs. QYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZAP is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the Global X U.S. Electrification Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ZAP returned 28.84% vs 23.93% for QYLD. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.

Performance

ZAP vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZAP achieves a 15.14% return, which is significantly higher than QYLD's 7.88% return.

ZAP

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: -3.98%
• YTD: 15.14%
• 6M: 13.19%
• 1Y: 28.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QYLD

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 1.62%
• YTD: 7.88%
• 6M: 9.97%
• 1Y: 23.93%
• 3Y*: 13.80%
• 5Y*: 8.43%
• 10Y*: 9.80%

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

ZAP vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	15.14%	21.84%	1.26%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	7.88%	9.28%	1.07%

Correlation

The correlation between ZAP and QYLD 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 Dec 19, 2024	0.42

Return for Risk

ZAP vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZAP

ZAP Risk / Return Rank: 60
ZAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
ZAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
ZAP Omega Ratio Rank: 52
ZAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
ZAP Martin Ratio Rank: 58

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 88
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

ZAP vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). 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.

	ZAP	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	2.80	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	3.92	-1.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.63	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	4.84	-0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.25	28.36	-18.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZAP vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZAP Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is lower than the QYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZAP and QYLD, 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

	ZAP	QYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.92	2.80	-0.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	0.59	+1.04

Drawdowns

ZAP vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZAP drawdown since its inception was -12.38%, smaller than the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZAP and QYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZAP	QYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.38%	-24.75%	+12.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-4.97%	-2.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.11%	-0.06%	-4.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-3.84%	+1.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	0.85%	+1.98%

Volatility

ZAP vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison

Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) has a higher volatility of 6.28% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) at 1.85%. This indicates that ZAP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZAP	QYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.28%	1.85%	+4.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.74%	7.12%	+4.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.13%	8.58%	+6.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.91%	14.70%	+2.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.91%	15.49%	+1.42%

ZAP vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZAP vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

ZAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, less than QYLD's 11.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.46%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	1.55%	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 ZAP and QYLD in my portfolio?

ZAP and QYLD 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, ZAP or QYLD?

ZAP has higher volatility (6.28%) compared to QYLD (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZAP dropped -12.38% vs QYLD's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, ZAP or QYLD?

On 1-year performance, ZAP leads with 28.84% vs 23.93% for QYLD. On fees, ZAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZAP or QYLD?

Over the 1-year period, ZAP has performed better with a 28.84% return vs 23.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZAP or QYLD?

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

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

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 1.55% for ZAP.

What is the main difference between ZAP and QYLD?

ZAP is categorized as Utilities Equities, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. ZAP tracks Global X U.S. Electrification Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for ZAP and 0.60% for QYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.92), 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.