AAMBX vs. AALGX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

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

Performance

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

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

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%

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%

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

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
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%

Correlation

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

Return for Risk

AAMBX vs. AALGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	AAMBX	AALGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	2.23	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.60	3.09	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.40	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.50	3.01	-0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.63	13.24	-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.

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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

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

Drawdowns

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

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

Volatility

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) is 1.32%, while Thrivent Global Stock Fund (AALGX) has a volatility of 3.29%. This indicates that AAMBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AALGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

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

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

AAMBX vs. AALGX - Dividend Comparison

AAMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, less than AALGX's 9.90% 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 AAMBX and AALGX in my portfolio?

AAMBX and AALGX 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, AAMBX or AALGX?

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

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.