PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZCBA vs. QYLD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF (ZCBA) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


ZCBA

1D
-0.40%
1M
-1.00%
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QYLD

1D
-1.82%
1M
-0.67%
YTD
5.92%
6M
7.78%
1Y
21.82%
3Y*
13.07%
5Y*
8.04%
10Y*
9.61%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZCBA and QYLD is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2026

0.26

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ZCBA vs. QYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZCBA

QYLD
QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF (ZCBA) 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ZCBAQYLDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.50

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.58

0.58

-1.16

Drawdowns

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCBA drawdown since its inception was -2.39%, smaller than the maximum QYLD drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCBA and QYLD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZCBAQYLDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.39%

-24.75%

+22.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.97%

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

-2.24%

-1.87%

-0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.00%

-3.84%

+2.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.85%

Volatility

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZCBAQYLDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.23%

8.78%

-5.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.23%

14.71%

-11.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.23%

15.50%

-12.27%

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZCBA has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than QYLD's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZCBA vs. QYLD - Dividend Comparison

ZCBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than QYLD's 11.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QYLD
Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF
11.67%11.55%12.50%11.78%13.75%12.85%11.16%9.84%12.44%7.69%9.15%9.42%
ZCBA
Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF
1.51%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ZCBA and QYLD have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZCBA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZCBA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QYLD.

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.67%, compared with 1.51% for ZCBA.

ZCBA is categorized as Government Bonds, while QYLD is Nasdaq-100. ZCBA tracks FTSE Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury STRIPS 2030 Maturity Index, while QYLD tracks CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for ZCBA and 0.60% for QYLD.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZCBA and QYLD

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer