ZAP vs. UTES

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) and UTES (Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds. ZAP is passively managed, while UTES is actively managed. Over the past year, ZAP returned 16.64% vs -3.98% for UTES. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. ZAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for UTES.

Performance

ZAP vs. UTES - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZAP achieves a 12.73% return, which is significantly higher than UTES's -1.07% return.

ZAP

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

UTES

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -4.28%
• 6M: 0.59%
• YTD: -1.07%
• 1Y: -3.98%
• 3Y*: 21.10%
• 5Y*: 14.97%
• 10Y*: 11.78%
• ALL TIME*: 13.50%

*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	$11.16M	$10.04M	$13.72M
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	$2.44M	$2.69M	$3.82M

ZAP vs. UTES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ZAP Global X U.S. Electrification ETF	12.73%	21.84%	1.26%
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	-1.07%	25.71%	-1.06%

Correlation

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

Return for Risk

ZAP vs. UTES — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

UTES

UTES Risk / Return Rank: 7
UTES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
UTES Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
UTES Omega Ratio Rank: 8
UTES Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
UTES Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

ZAP vs. UTES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) and Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES). 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.

	ZAP	UTES	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.02	-0.20	+1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	-0.14	+1.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	0.98	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	-0.31	+2.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.01	-0.65	+5.65

ZAP vs. UTES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZAP Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is higher than the UTES Sharpe Ratio of -0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZAP and UTES, 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

ZAP vs. UTES - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	ZAP	UTES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.38%	-35.39%	+23.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.18%	-13.88%	+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	-6.77%	-10.30%	+3.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.65%	-5.54%	+2.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	6.72%	-3.50%

Volatility

ZAP vs. UTES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X U.S. Electrification ETF (ZAP) is 4.72%, while Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that ZAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UTES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZAP	UTES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.72%	5.50%	-0.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.63%	16.19%	-3.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.88%	21.39%	-5.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.91%	20.74%	-3.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.91%	20.26%	-3.35%

ZAP vs. UTES - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

ZAP vs. UTES - Dividend Comparison

ZAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, more than UTES's 1.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	1.53%	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	1.67%	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 UTES in my portfolio?

ZAP and UTES 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, ZAP or UTES?

UTES has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to ZAP (4.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZAP dropped -12.38% vs UTES's -35.39%.

Which ETF is better, ZAP or UTES?

On 1-year performance, ZAP leads with 16.64% vs -3.98% for UTES. On fees, UTES is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, ZAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZAP or UTES?

Over the 1-year period, ZAP has performed better with a 16.64% return vs -3.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZAP or UTES?

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

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

ZAP has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 1.53% for UTES.

What is the main difference between ZAP and UTES?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs -0.20), 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.