AAMBX vs. FGNSX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AAMBX (Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund) and FGNSX (Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Over the past 5 years, AAMBX returned 0.61%/yr vs 2.09%/yr for FGNSX. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAMBX charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for FGNSX.

Performance

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) and Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund (FGNSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAMBX achieves a 2.08% return, which is significantly higher than FGNSX's 0.77% return.

AAMBX

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 2.10%
• YTD: 2.08%
• 6M: 2.51%
• 1Y: 7.33%
• 3Y*: 3.79%
• 5Y*: 0.61%
• 10Y*: 1.71%

FGNSX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 0.77%
• 6M: 1.05%
• 1Y: 2.58%
• 3Y*: 3.21%
• 5Y*: 2.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AAMBX Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund	2.08%	3.39%	2.70%	6.18%	-10.93%	1.99%	4.78%	7.38%	0.32%	0.45%
FGNSX Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund	0.77%	3.08%	3.47%	3.56%	-0.36%	0.14%	1.04%	2.11%	1.47%	-0.10%

Correlation

The correlation between AAMBX and FGNSX is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 28, 2017	0.46

The correlation between AAMBX and FGNSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.49 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

AAMBX vs. FGNSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

AAMBX

AAMBX Risk / Return Rank: 63
AAMBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
AAMBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
AAMBX Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AAMBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
AAMBX Martin Ratio Rank: 40

FGNSX

FGNSX Risk / Return Rank: 97
FGNSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FGNSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
FGNSX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
FGNSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FGNSX Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. FGNSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) and Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund (FGNSX). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AAMBX	FGNSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.21	2.98	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	7.43	-3.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	2.83	-1.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	6.12	-3.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.26	27.60	-19.34

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAMBX Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the FGNSX Sharpe Ratio of 2.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAMBX and FGNSX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAMBX drawdown since its inception was -49.18%, which is greater than FGNSX's maximum drawdown of -2.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAMBX and FGNSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAMBX	FGNSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.18%	-2.35%	-46.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.13%	-0.50%	-2.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.56%	-2.35%	-5.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.17%	-2.35%	-13.82%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-16.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	0.00%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-0.25%	-4.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	0.11%	+0.79%

Volatility

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Volatility Comparison

Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) has a higher volatility of 0.90% compared to Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund (FGNSX) at 0.28%. This indicates that AAMBX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGNSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAMBX	FGNSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.90%	0.28%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.53%	0.65%	+1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.39%	1.02%	+2.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.77%	2.06%	+2.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.43%	1.65%	+2.78%

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAMBX has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FGNSX's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

AAMBX vs. FGNSX - Dividend Comparison

AAMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, more than FGNSX's 2.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
FGNSX Strategic Advisers Tax-Sensitive Short Duration Fund	2.34%	2.63%	3.31%	2.57%	0.84%	0.34%	0.83%	1.79%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAMBX and FGNSX in my portfolio?

AAMBX and FGNSX have a correlation of 0.38, 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 FGNSX?

AAMBX has higher volatility (0.90%) compared to FGNSX (0.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAMBX dropped -49.18% vs FGNSX's -2.35%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGNSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.98 vs 2.21), 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.