ZTWO vs. NUSA

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZTWO (F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and NUSA (Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) are both Short-Term Bond funds - ZTWO tracks the ICE 2-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross while NUSA tracks the ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond (1-5 Y). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ZTWO returned 3.94% vs 3.56% for NUSA. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTWO) and Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZTWO achieves a 0.93% return, which is significantly higher than NUSA's 0.48% return.

ZTWO

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 0.93%
• 6M: 1.30%
• 1Y: 3.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NUSA

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 0.48%
• 6M: 0.72%
• 1Y: 3.56%
• 3Y*: 4.37%
• 5Y*: 1.53%
• 10Y*: —

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

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ZTWO F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF	0.93%	5.49%	0.36%
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	0.48%	5.89%	0.36%

Correlation

The correlation between ZTWO and NUSA 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	0.79

The correlation between ZTWO and NUSA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ZTWO vs. NUSA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZTWO

ZTWO Risk / Return Rank: 90
ZTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
ZTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
ZTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 93
ZTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ZTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 89

NUSA

NUSA Risk / Return Rank: 62
NUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
NUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
NUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 66
NUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
NUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

ZTWO vs. NUSA - 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 Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA). 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	NUSA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.03	1.98	+1.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.86	3.13	+1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.63	1.39	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.24	2.79	+1.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.10	9.89	+10.21
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZTWO Sharpe Ratio is 3.03, which is higher than the NUSA Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZTWO and NUSA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZTWO	NUSA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.03	1.98	+1.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.17	0.82	+2.35

Drawdowns

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZTWO drawdown since its inception was -0.93%, smaller than the maximum NUSA drawdown of -9.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZTWO and NUSA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZTWO	NUSA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.93%	-9.44%	+8.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.93%	-1.28%	+0.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.62%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.44%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.46%	+0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.10%	-1.65%	+1.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.20%	0.36%	-0.16%

Volatility

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for F/M 2-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTWO) is 0.42%, while Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) has a volatility of 0.66%. This indicates that ZTWO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZTWO	NUSA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.42%	0.66%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.97%	1.33%	-0.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.31%	1.82%	-0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.49%	2.80%	-1.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.49%	2.72%	-1.23%

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ZTWO and NUSA have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ZTWO vs. NUSA - Dividend Comparison

ZTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, more than NUSA's 3.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	3.86%	3.83%	3.93%	3.54%	2.44%	2.16%	2.51%	2.85%	3.22%	2.20%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZTWO and NUSA in my portfolio?

ZTWO and NUSA 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.

Which is riskier, ZTWO or NUSA?

NUSA has higher volatility (0.66%) compared to ZTWO (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZTWO dropped -0.93% vs NUSA's -9.44%.

Which ETF is better, ZTWO or NUSA?

On 1-year performance, ZTWO leads with 3.94% vs 3.56% for NUSA. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, ZTWO has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ZTWO or NUSA?

Over the 1-year period, ZTWO has performed better with a 3.94% return vs 3.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZTWO or NUSA?

ZTWO and NUSA have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZTWO or NUSA?

ZTWO has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 3.86% for NUSA.

What is the main difference between ZTWO and NUSA?

ZTWO tracks ICE 2-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while NUSA tracks ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond (1-5 Y). They also come from different issuers: F/m and Nuveen.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZTWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 1.98), 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.