ZAP vs. TAN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) and TAN (Invesco Solar ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZAP is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the Global X U.S. Electrification Index, while TAN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MAC Global Solar Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ZAP returned 28.84% vs 112.42% for TAN. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TAN.

Performance

ZAP vs. TAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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 lower than TAN's 43.10% return.

ZAP

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

TAN

• 1D: -2.74%
• 1M: 20.40%
• YTD: 43.10%
• 6M: 48.35%
• 1Y: 112.42%
• 3Y*: -0.64%
• 5Y*: -1.65%
• 10Y*: 13.50%

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

ZAP vs. TAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	15.14%	21.84%	1.26%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	43.10%	48.31%	-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between ZAP and TAN is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.43

Return for Risk

ZAP vs. TAN — 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

TAN

TAN Risk / Return Rank: 85
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 72
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. TAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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	TAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	3.05	-1.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	3.62	-1.00
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.44	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	8.30	-4.29
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.25	20.09	-9.84
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. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZAP Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is lower than the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZAP and TAN, 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	TAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.92	3.05	-1.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.36	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	-0.12	+1.76

Drawdowns

ZAP vs. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZAP drawdown since its inception was -12.38%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZAP and TAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZAP	TAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.38%	-95.29%	+82.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-13.62%	+6.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-64.40%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-73.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-78.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.11%	-67.72%	+63.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-78.51%	+75.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	5.62%	-2.79%

Volatility

ZAP vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) is 6.28%, while Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) has a volatility of 12.15%. This indicates that ZAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZAP	TAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.28%	12.15%	-5.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.74%	25.32%	-13.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.13%	37.29%	-22.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.91%	39.74%	-22.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.91%	37.98%	-21.07%

ZAP vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZAP vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

ZAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, while TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.50%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.09%	0.30%	0.69%	1.77%	5.04%	1.60%
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 TAN in my portfolio?

ZAP and TAN have a correlation of 0.41, 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 TAN?

TAN has higher volatility (12.15%) compared to ZAP (6.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZAP dropped -12.38% vs TAN's -95.29%.

Which ETF is better, ZAP or TAN?

On 1-year performance, TAN leads with 112.42% vs 28.84% for ZAP. On fees, ZAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ZAP has been the lower-risk option at 6.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZAP or TAN?

Over the 1-year period, TAN has performed better with a 112.42% return vs 28.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZAP or TAN?

ZAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TAN.

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

ZAP has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

What is the main difference between ZAP and TAN?

ZAP is categorized as Utilities Equities, while TAN is Alternative Energy Equities. ZAP tracks Global X U.S. Electrification Index, while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for ZAP and 0.69% for TAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 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.