TSLP vs ZALT
Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Tesla ETF vs Innovator US Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly
Which is better, TSLP or ZALT?
ZALT has been ahead.
ZALT has a lower expense ratio. ZALT led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | TSLP | ZALT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.69%Best |
| AUM | $17M | $794M |
| Dividend Yield | 34.23% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 21 | 18 |
| YTD Return | -37.14% | +6.44%Best |
| 1Y Return | -35.49% | +9.12%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -16.43% | +10.33%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 49.0% | 3.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -67.7% | -8.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 3 years | $5,836 | $13,750Best |
| Fund Family | Kurv | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Oct 27, 2023 | Oct 2, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 27, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3 years).
TSLP vs ZALT growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 3 years both funds cover.
TSLP vs ZALT Performance
Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Tesla ETF (TSLP) is an ETF from Kurv and Innovator US Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (ZALT) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year TSLP returned -35.49% while ZALT returned +9.12%. Year to date, TSLP is down 37.14% versus a gain of 6.44% for ZALT.
Over three years, TSLP compounded at -16.43% per year against +10.33% for ZALT.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TSLP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 49.0% compared with 3.8% for ZALT. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -67.7% for TSLP and -8.2% for ZALT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.25. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
TSLP charges 1.00% per year while ZALT charges 0.69%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $69 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, TSLP currently yields 34.23% against 0.00% for ZALT.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of TSLP and ZALT you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, TSLP or ZALT?
TSLP has an expense ratio of 1.00% while ZALT charges 0.69%. ZALT is the cheaper option, by $31 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, TSLP or ZALT?
Over the past year TSLP returned -35.49% vs +9.12% for ZALT, so ZALT leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, TSLP or ZALT?
TSLP has been the more volatile fund at 49.0% annualized versus 3.8% for ZALT. Worst drawdown: TSLP -67.7% vs ZALT -8.2%.
Should I hold both TSLP and ZALT?
TSLP and ZALT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.25, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, TSLP or ZALT?
TSLP yields 34.23% while ZALT yields 0.00%, so TSLP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZALT better than TSLP?
ZALT has a lower expense ratio. ZALT led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.