XLF vs ZAP
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF vs Global X US Electrification ETF
Which is better, XLF or ZAP?
Each has led over a different period.
XLF has a lower expense ratio. XLF led over 1Y, ZAP over the full window. ZAP is less concentrated, with 44.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%.
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 | XLF | ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.08%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $51.9B | $440M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.40% | 1.74% |
| Holdings | 160 | 94 |
| YTD Return | +0.47% | +6.45%Best |
| 1Y Return | +4.02%Best | +2.72% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.43% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.82% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.9%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.5% | -13.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $11,777 | $13,487Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.3% | 44.2%Best |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 16, 1998 | Dec 17, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 18, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
XLF vs ZAP 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
XLF vs ZAP Performance
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Global X US Electrification ETF (ZAP) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year XLF returned +4.02% while ZAP returned +2.72%. Year to date, XLF is up 0.47% versus a gain of 6.45% for ZAP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ZAP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 12.9% for XLF. 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 -15.5% for XLF and -13.0% for ZAP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.02. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
XLF charges 0.08% per year while ZAP charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $8 vs $50 annually, a gap of $42 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, XLF currently yields 1.40% against 1.74% for ZAP.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 77 holdings in XLF and 45 in ZAP, totalling 99.8% and 100.4% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 77 positions we hold weights for in XLF and 45 in ZAP, against full books of 160 and 94.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 44 positions for ZAP that do not appear in our book for XLF (98.8% of the fund), and 76 for XLF that do not appear in ZAP (99.5%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of XLF and ZAP 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, XLF or ZAP?
XLF has an expense ratio of 0.08% while ZAP charges 0.50%. XLF is the cheaper option, by $42 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, XLF or ZAP?
Over the past year XLF returned +4.02% vs +2.72% for ZAP, so XLF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), XLF annualized +9.51% vs +18.08% for ZAP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, XLF or ZAP?
ZAP has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 12.9% for XLF. Worst drawdown: XLF -15.5% vs ZAP -13.0%.
Should I hold both XLF and ZAP?
XLF and ZAP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.02, 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, XLF or ZAP?
XLF yields 1.40% while ZAP yields 1.74%, so ZAP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZAP better than XLF?
XLF has a lower expense ratio. XLF led over 1Y, ZAP over the full window. ZAP is less concentrated, with 44.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.