ZINC vs. EFAS

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

ZINC (Zacks Income ETF) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both Dividend funds. ZINC is actively managed, while EFAS is passively managed. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.55% expense ratio.

Performance

ZINC vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Zacks Income ETF (ZINC) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ZINC

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 1.96%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EFAS

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 1.29%
• 6M: 14.80%
• YTD: 16.52%
• 1Y: 29.95%
• 3Y*: 23.96%
• 5Y*: 13.65%
• 10Y*: —

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

ZINC vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
ZINC Zacks Income ETF	3.90%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	2.04%

Correlation

The correlation between ZINC and EFAS is 0.42, 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 Jun 2, 2026	0.42

Return for Risk

ZINC vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZINC

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

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 92
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 92
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

ZINC vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Zacks Income ETF (ZINC) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.

	ZINC	EFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.76	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.86	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.49	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	5.68	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	13.87	—

Drawdowns

ZINC vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZINC drawdown since its inception was -1.94%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZINC and EFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZINC	EFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.94%	-44.38%	+42.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.30%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.84%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	0.00%	-0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.47%	-7.02%	+6.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.16%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZINC	EFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.81%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.73%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.19%	10.96%	-0.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.19%	15.57%	-5.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.19%	18.26%	-8.07%

ZINC vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ZINC and EFAS have an expense ratio of 0.55%.

Dividends

ZINC vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

ZINC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EFAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.68%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.68%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%
ZINC Zacks Income ETF	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 ZINC and EFAS in my portfolio?

ZINC and EFAS have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZINC or EFAS?

Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZINC or EFAS?

ZINC and EFAS have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZINC or EFAS?

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.68%, compared with 0.00% for ZINC.

What is the main difference between ZINC and EFAS?

They also come from different issuers: Zacks and Global X.