AIHY
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
AIHY vs ZAP: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of Defiance AI Hyperscale Leaders ETF and Global X U.S. Electrification ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
No track record yet. AIHY launched within the last six months. The forward distribution rate is left blank until a payout is published.
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
ZAP
Safe
High confidence
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  AIHY |  ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Defiance AI Hyperscale Leaders ETF | Global X U.S. Electrification ETF |
| Issuer | Defiance ETFs | Global X |
| Last Close | $20.46 as of November 6, 2026 | $30.92 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | 1.94% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | — | 1.92% |
| 30-day SEC yield | 1.31% | 2.14% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | 97 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | — | 1.88% |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.50% |
| AUM | $16.5M | $445M |
| Distribution frequency | Annual | Quarterly |
| Underlying index | — | — |
| Objective | Seeks long-term capital appreciation by investing in the companies building and operating the compute backbone of artificial intelligence — spanning AI compute infrastructure, cloud platforms, data centers, semiconductors, and AI software. Holdings must derive at least 50% of revenues, assets, or spending from AI and demonstrate revenue growing faster than operating expenses. | — |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 07/20/2026 | 12/17/2024 |
| Beta | — | 0.6103 |
| Last dividend | — | $0.15 |
| Ex-dividend date | — | 10/05/2026 |
— Distribution rate, Safety-Adjusted Yield, last dividend, and ex-dividend date are not yet available because AIHY launched July 2026; these fields will populate after the first distribution.
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
AIHY has lagged ZAP over the year to date, posting a 1.66% total return against 7.21%. ZAP has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 17.7% against 28.8% for AIHY. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | Since Jul 2026 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIHY | 1.66% | 1.66% | 28.8% | 0.05 | 0.07 | -13.0% |
| ZAP | 7.21% | -7.02% | 17.7% | -1.59 | -2.05 | -10.8% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jul 2026” measures every fund from July 21, 2026 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the shared window since Jul 2026. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the shared window since Jul 2026) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Distribution rate and SEC yield
| Metric | AIHY | ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Forward distribution rate | — | 1.94% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | — | 1.92% |
| 30-day SEC yield | 1.31% | 2.14% |
Total return (price change plus reinvested distributions) is the Total returns section above. A 30-day SEC yield can sit far from the headline distribution rate; both numbers are the fund's own published fields.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineWe won't call this one: AIHY launched July 2026, so there is not yet a track record to compare. Compare the strategy, cost and holdings in the sections above and treat any performance figures for the newer ETF as provisional.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs91
Total AUM$9.47B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Defiance ETFs is known for offering specialized and thematic investment strategies that cater to niche market segments and alternative income approaches. The issuer's lineup spans income-focused funds, leveraged strategies, combinations of leverage with income generation, and thematic products tied to emerging trends and sectors. Defiance emphasizes non-traditional and differentiated strategies rather than broad-based index exposure, appealing to investors seeking targeted exposure beyond conventional ETF offerings.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on AIHY.
ETFs116
Total AUM$89.1B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Global X is known for offering a diverse lineup of thematic and income-focused ETFs that cater to both traditional and alternative investment strategies. Their fund families span income generation through covered call strategies and SuperDividend funds, alongside thematic exposure in areas like digital assets, robotics, and emerging markets, complemented by bond and commodities offerings. The issuer provides broad coverage across sector-specific, risk-managed, and growth-oriented strategies, making their lineup particularly notable for investors seeking specialized exposure beyond conventional equity and fixed-income categories.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on ZAP.
Quick verdict
AIHY (Defiance AI Hyperscale Leaders ETF) and ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
ZAP currently shows a 1.94% distribution yield. AIHY has not yet established a full distribution history, so a comparable yield figure is not available.
AIHY is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.37% compared to 0.50%.
ZAP has $445M in assets vs $16.5M for AIHY, but AIHY only launched July 2026 — AUM comparisons will become more meaningful as it builds a track record.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
— shared positions
AIHY top-10 holdings unavailable
ZAP 0.0% of its top-10 weight
Top-10 holdings unavailable for AIHY — cannot compute overlap.
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, AIHY has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while ZAP would pay about $194.00 a year (about $48.50 per quarterly distribution).
AIHY yield—
ZAP yield1.94%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, AIHY would cost approximately $370 in fees vs $500 for ZAP (simplified, not compounded). The $130.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
AIHY ER0.37%
ZAP ER0.50%
Strategy & risk
AIHY is an ETF built around technology exposure, while ZAP is an ETF.
AIHY beta—
ZAP beta0.6103
Fund details
AIHY is managed by Defiance ETFs (launched 07/20/2026) with $16.5M in assets. ZAP is managed by Global X (launched 12/17/2024) with $445M in assets.
AIHY AUM$16.5M
ZAP AUM$445M
Frequently asked questions
Which of AIHY or ZAP pays more dividend income?
ZAP currently reports a distribution yield, while AIHY has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.
What is the difference between AIHY and ZAP?
AIHY (Defiance AI Hyperscale Leaders ETF) is an ETF built around technology exposure, while ZAP (Global X U.S. Electrification ETF) is an ETF. They are issued by Defiance ETFs and Global X respectively.
Can I hold both AIHY and ZAP?
Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.
Which has lower fees, AIHY or ZAP?
AIHY has an expense ratio of 0.37% while ZAP charges 0.50%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in AIHY vs ZAP generate?
At current distribution rates, AIHY has not established a distribution history yet, so a cash estimate is not available. $10,000 in ZAP would pay about $194.00 a year (about $48.50 per quarterly distribution).
Which has performed better historically, AIHY or ZAP?
AIHY has lagged ZAP over the year to date, posting a 1.66% total return against 7.21%. ZAP has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 17.7% against 28.8% for AIHY. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare AIHY with
People also compare ZAP with
Popular comparisons
AIHY vs ZAP — at a glance
Generated November 1, 2026.
Overview
AIHY and ZAP are both equity ETFs launched in 2024–2026 targeting structural growth themes, but they pursue opposite investment universes. AIHY focuses on the compute infrastructure powering artificial intelligence—semiconductors, data centers, cloud platforms, and AI software companies—while ZAP targets the buildout of electrification infrastructure: grid modernization, EV charging, battery technology, and related utilities and industrials. They represent competing demand drivers in the energy and technology landscape.
How they differ
The single largest difference is their underlying exposure: AIHY invests in AI compute and software infrastructure, while ZAP targets electrification and grid-modernization plays. This shapes their revenue drivers, customer bases, and regulatory environments fundamentally differently. The presence of distributions in ZAP reflects exposure to dividend-paying utilities alongside growth companies.
Who each is best for
AIHY: Fits investors seeking concentrated exposure to AI infrastructure buildout who are comfortable with a narrowly defined sector bet, accept higher concentration risk, and prioritize long-term capital growth over current income.
ZAP: Designed for investors who want diversified participation in the energy transition and infrastructure modernization, tolerate moderate equity-market sensitivity, and value quarterly income alongside capital appreciation.
Key risks to know
- Concentration in AI infrastructure: AIHY requires holdings to derive at least 50% of revenues, assets, or spending from AI, making the fund highly concentrated in a narrow theme. If AI adoption slows, deployment stalls, or competition intensifies, the fund's holdings lack diversification into non-AI revenue streams. Small, newer funds may experience wider bid-ask spreads and lower trading volume, and the fund's track record is too brief to evaluate strategy execution.
- Electrification policy and regulatory dependency: ZAP's performance hinges on government subsidies, grid regulation, and policy continuity (EV tax credits, infrastructure spending, state electrification mandates). A shift in energy policy or subsidy reversal could significantly impact valuations.
- Utility dividend stability in ZAP: Many electrification plays include traditional utilities and regulated infrastructure companies. ZAP's yield depends on dividend maintenance by these holdings during periods of rising interest rates or capital-intensive upgrades—a risk less relevant for AIHY, which carries no yield pressure.
- Sector momentum dependency: AIHY's performance relies on sustained investment flow into AI infrastructure. If the AI cycle moderates or capital redirects to other technologies, the fund's narrow scope offers no ballast from other themes, unlike ZAP's diversification across multiple segments of the energy transition.
Bottom line
If you want pure-play AI infrastructure exposure and accept narrow concentration and early-fund risks, AIHY's 0.37% fee and focused mandate offer that positioning. If you prefer diversified participation in energy transition with an income component and a larger, established fund, ZAP's $445M asset base, 1.94% yield, and broader policy exposure represent a different profile. Past performance does not predict future results; both funds carry meaningful sector and policy risks that warrant close attention to strategy changes and holdings overlap.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.