ZCBA vs. URA

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

ZCBA (Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium 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 URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZCBA charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

ZCBA vs. URA - 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 Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ZCBA

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

URA

• 1D: -9.88%
• 1M: -22.23%
• YTD: 6.04%
• 6M: -0.93%
• 1Y: 43.12%
• 3Y*: 33.77%
• 5Y*: 18.83%
• 10Y*: 15.20%

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

ZCBA vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
ZCBA Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2030 ETF	-0.76%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	-9.07%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCBA and URA is 0.23, 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	0.23

Return for Risk

ZCBA vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 27
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 25
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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. URA - 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 Uranium ETF (URA). 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZCBA	URA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.58	-0.07	-0.51

Drawdowns

ZCBA vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCBA drawdown since its inception was -2.39%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCBA and URA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZCBA	URA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.39%	-93.54%	+91.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-28.43%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-37.81%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.90%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-61.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.24%	-48.58%	+46.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.00%	-74.99%	+73.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	13.56%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZCBA	URA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	16.84%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	39.54%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.23%	51.13%	-47.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.23%	43.81%	-40.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.23%	37.83%	-34.60%

ZCBA vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZCBA has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZCBA vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

ZCBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than URA's 4.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.60%	4.88%	2.86%	6.07%	0.76%	5.84%	1.69%	1.66%	0.44%	2.03%	7.28%	1.96%
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

Can I hold both ZCBA and URA in my portfolio?

ZCBA and URA have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZCBA or URA?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZCBA or URA?

ZCBA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZCBA or URA?

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 1.51% for ZCBA.

What is the main difference between ZCBA and URA?

ZCBA is categorized as Government Bonds, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. ZCBA tracks FTSE Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury STRIPS 2030 Maturity Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for ZCBA and 0.69% for URA.