ZCBA vs. QYLD
ZCBA (Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF) and QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZCBA is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury STRIPS 2030 Maturity Index, while QYLD is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the CBOE NASDAQ-100 Buy Write V2. Both are passively managed. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZCBA charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QYLD.
Performance
ZCBA vs. QYLD - Performance Comparison
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%
ZCBA vs. QYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ZCBA Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF | -0.76% |
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF | 4.97% |
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
ZCBA
QYLD
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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZCBA | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| ZCBA | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.24% | -1.87% | -0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.00% | -3.84% | +2.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.85% | — |
Volatility
ZCBA vs. QYLD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZCBA | QYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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