ZCBF vs. TFLO
ZCBF (Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2034 ETF) and TFLO (iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both Government Bonds funds - ZCBF tracks the FTSE Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury STRIPS 2034 Maturity Index while TFLO tracks the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Floating Rate Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. ZCBF charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TFLO.
Performance
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ZCBF
- 1D
- -0.59%
- 1M
- -1.29%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TFLO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- YTD
- 1.61%
- 6M
- 1.88%
- 1Y
- 3.97%
- 3Y*
- 4.74%
- 5Y*
- 3.64%
- 10Y*
- 2.36%
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ZCBF Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2034 ETF | -1.01% |
TFLO iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF | 1.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZCBF and TFLO is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2026 | -0.10 |
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
ZCBF vs. TFLO — Risk / Return Rank
ZCBF
TFLO
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2034 ETF (ZCBF) and iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO). 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
| ZCBF | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 14.09 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 10.30 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 5.19 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.42 | 0.99 | -1.41 |
Drawdowns
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZCBF drawdown since its inception was -4.66%, smaller than the maximum TFLO drawdown of -5.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCBF and TFLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZCBF | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.66% | -5.01% | +0.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.04% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -0.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.16% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.67% | 0.00% | -3.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.85% | -0.10% | -1.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.00% | — |
Volatility
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZCBF | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.07% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.20% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.78% | 0.28% | +5.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.78% | 0.35% | +5.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.78% | 0.46% | +5.32% |
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZCBF has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than TFLO's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ZCBF vs. TFLO - Dividend Comparison
ZCBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, less than TFLO's 3.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TFLO iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF | 3.90% | 4.16% | 5.21% | 4.88% | 1.68% | 0.00% | 0.36% | 2.08% | 1.65% | 0.86% | 0.31% | 0.15% |
ZCBF Global X Zero Coupon Bond 2034 ETF | 1.70% | 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
ZCBF and TFLO have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZCBF is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZCBF is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for TFLO.
TFLO has the higher dividend yield at 3.90%, compared with 1.70% for ZCBF.
ZCBF tracks FTSE Zero Coupon U.S. Treasury STRIPS 2034 Maturity Index, while TFLO tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Floating Rate Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for ZCBF and 0.15% for TFLO.
Find the right allocation for ZCBF and TFLO
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