AALGX vs. AAMBX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AALGX (Thrivent Global Stock Fund) and AAMBX (Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund) are both mutual funds - AALGX is a Global Equities fund managed by Thrivent, while AAMBX is a Municipal Bonds fund managed by Thrivent. Over the past 10 years, AALGX returned 11.43%/yr vs 1.79%/yr for AAMBX. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. AALGX charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for AAMBX.

Performance

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Thrivent Global Stock Fund (AALGX) and Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AALGX achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly higher than AAMBX's 1.88% return. Over the past 10 years, AALGX has outperformed AAMBX with an annualized return of 11.43%, while AAMBX has yielded a comparatively lower 1.79% annualized return.

AALGX

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 5.08%
• YTD: 11.59%
• 6M: 12.67%
• 1Y: 27.02%
• 3Y*: 24.12%
• 5Y*: 12.64%
• 10Y*: 11.43%

AAMBX

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 0.98%
• YTD: 1.88%
• 6M: 2.20%
• 1Y: 7.89%
• 3Y*: 3.89%
• 5Y*: 0.57%
• 10Y*: 1.79%

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

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AALGX Thrivent Global Stock Fund	11.59%	20.49%	27.79%	21.71%	-19.38%	20.37%	14.46%	22.71%	-8.75%	10.85%
AAMBX Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund	1.88%	3.39%	2.70%	6.18%	-10.93%	1.99%	4.78%	7.38%	0.32%	4.47%

Correlation

The correlation between AALGX and AAMBX is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.13
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 1996	-0.07

The correlation between AALGX and AAMBX shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (all time) to 0.23 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

AALGX vs. AAMBX — Risk / Return Rank

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

AALGX

AALGX Risk / Return Rank: 59
AALGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
AALGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
AALGX Omega Ratio Rank: 53
AALGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
AALGX Martin Ratio Rank: 69

AAMBX

AAMBX Risk / Return Rank: 60
AAMBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
AAMBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
AAMBX Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AAMBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
AAMBX Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Thrivent Global Stock Fund (AALGX) and Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX). 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.

	AALGX	AAMBX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	2.28	-0.05
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.09	3.60	-0.51
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.54	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.01	2.50	+0.51
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.24	8.63	+4.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AALGX Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the AAMBX Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AALGX and AAMBX, 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

	AALGX	AAMBX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.23	2.28	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.12	+0.56
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	0.41	+0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.46	-0.01

Drawdowns

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AALGX drawdown since its inception was -55.28%, which is greater than AAMBX's maximum drawdown of -49.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AALGX and AAMBX.

Drawdown Indicators

	AALGX	AAMBX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.28%	-49.18%	-6.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.10%	-3.13%	-5.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.65%	-7.56%	-9.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.65%	-16.17%	-18.48%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.32%	-16.17%	-19.15%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.08%	+0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.50%	-5.20%	-5.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.06%	0.90%	+1.16%

Volatility

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Volatility Comparison

Thrivent Global Stock Fund (AALGX) has a higher volatility of 3.29% compared to Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) at 1.32%. This indicates that AALGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAMBX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AALGX	AAMBX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	1.32%	+1.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.68%	2.54%	+7.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.27%	3.44%	+8.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.68%	4.77%	+13.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.33%	4.43%	+13.90%

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Expense Ratio Comparison

AALGX has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than AAMBX's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

AALGX vs. AAMBX - Dividend Comparison

AALGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.90%, more than AAMBX's 3.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AALGX Thrivent Global Stock Fund	9.90%	11.05%	23.12%	5.51%	3.21%	14.40%	3.01%	12.68%	9.82%	1.00%	1.15%	0.00%
AAMBX Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund	3.51%	4.65%	3.93%	2.58%	2.97%	2.66%	2.80%	3.35%	3.45%	3.40%	3.41%	3.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AALGX and AAMBX in my portfolio?

AALGX and AAMBX have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AALGX or AAMBX?

AALGX has higher volatility (3.29%) compared to AAMBX (1.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AALGX dropped -55.28% vs AAMBX's -49.18%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAMBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 2.23), 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.