ZTWO vs. NEAR
ZTWO (F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and NEAR (iShares Short Duration Bond Active ETF) are both Short-Term Bond funds. ZTWO is passively managed, while NEAR is actively managed. Over the past year, ZTWO returned 3.94% vs 4.14% for NEAR. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ZTWO charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for NEAR.
Performance
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZTWO achieves a 0.93% return, which is significantly higher than NEAR's 0.75% return.
ZTWO
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 0.93%
- 6M
- 1.30%
- 1Y
- 3.94%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NEAR
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 0.75%
- 6M
- 1.25%
- 1Y
- 4.14%
- 3Y*
- 5.63%
- 5Y*
- 3.86%
- 10Y*
- 2.85%
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ZTWO F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.93% | 5.49% | 0.36% |
NEAR iShares Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 0.75% | 5.90% | 0.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZTWO and NEAR is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2024 | 0.80 |
The correlation between ZTWO and NEAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ZTWO vs. NEAR — Risk / Return Rank
ZTWO
NEAR
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTWO) and iShares Short Duration Bond Active ETF (NEAR). 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.
| ZTWO | NEAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.63 | 1.64 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.24 | 3.67 | +0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.10 | 16.84 | +3.26 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZTWO | NEAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.03 | 3.08 | -0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 2.90 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.15 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 3.17 | 1.09 | +2.08 |
Drawdowns
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZTWO drawdown since its inception was -0.93%, smaller than the maximum NEAR drawdown of -9.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZTWO and NEAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZTWO | NEAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.93% | -9.61% | +8.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.93% | -1.13% | +0.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.16% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -1.32% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -9.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.07% | -0.07% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.10% | -0.16% | +0.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.20% | 0.25% | -0.05% |
Volatility
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Volatility Comparison
F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTWO) has a higher volatility of 0.42% compared to iShares Short Duration Bond Active ETF (NEAR) at 0.37%. This indicates that ZTWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NEAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZTWO | NEAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 0.37% | +0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.97% | 0.99% | -0.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.31% | 1.36% | -0.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.49% | 1.34% | +0.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.49% | 2.50% | -1.01% |
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZTWO has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than NEAR's 0.25% 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
ZTWO vs. NEAR - Dividend Comparison
ZTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, less than NEAR's 4.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NEAR iShares Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 4.43% | 4.54% | 5.00% | 4.59% | 1.78% | 0.76% | 1.53% | 2.69% | 2.25% | 1.52% | 1.07% | 0.85% |
ZTWO F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.12% | 4.31% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZTWO and NEAR have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ZTWO has higher volatility (0.42%) compared to NEAR (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZTWO dropped -0.93% vs NEAR's -9.61%.
On 1-year performance, NEAR leads with 4.14% vs 3.94% for ZTWO. On fees, ZTWO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, NEAR has performed better with a 4.14% return vs 3.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ZTWO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for NEAR.
NEAR has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 4.12% for ZTWO.
They also come from different issuers: F/m and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for ZTWO and 0.25% for NEAR.
NEAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 vs 3.03), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ZTWO and NEAR
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