PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AAMBX vs. FSMUX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAMBX achieves a 2.18% return, which is significantly higher than FSMUX's 1.59% return.


AAMBX

1D
0.10%
1M
2.20%
YTD
2.18%
6M
2.61%
1Y
7.55%
3Y*
3.93%
5Y*
0.60%
10Y*
1.77%

FSMUX

1D
0.11%
1M
1.82%
YTD
1.59%
6M
2.06%
1Y
6.69%
3Y*
3.82%
5Y*
0.55%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
AAMBX
Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund
2.18%3.39%2.70%6.18%-10.93%0.16%
FSMUX
Strategic Advisers Municipal Bond Fund
1.59%3.14%2.99%6.78%-11.25%0.39%

Correlation

The correlation between AAMBX and FSMUX is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.83

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2021

0.87

The correlation between AAMBX and FSMUX shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AAMBX vs. FSMUX — Risk / Return Rank

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

AAMBX
AAMBX Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
AAMBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAMBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAMBX Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
AAMBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAMBX Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

FSMUX
FSMUX Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FSMUX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSMUX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSMUX Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FSMUX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSMUX Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FSMUX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) and Strategic Advisers Municipal Bond Fund (FSMUX). 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.


AAMBXFSMUXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

1.68

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

2.96

-0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.37

10.85

-2.48

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAMBX Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the FSMUX Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAMBX and FSMUX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAMBX drawdown since its inception was -49.18%, which is greater than FSMUX's maximum drawdown of -16.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAMBX and FSMUX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AAMBXFSMUXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.18%

-16.27%

-32.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.13%

-2.68%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.56%

-5.95%

-1.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.17%

-16.27%

+0.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-16.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.20%

-5.40%

+0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.90%

0.71%

+0.19%

Volatility

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Volatility Comparison

Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund (AAMBX) and Strategic Advisers Municipal Bond Fund (FSMUX) have volatilities of 0.87% and 0.84%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AAMBXFSMUXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.87%

0.84%

+0.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.53%

2.06%

+0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.38%

3.09%

+0.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.77%

4.62%

+0.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.43%

4.62%

-0.19%

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAMBX has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FSMUX's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

AAMBX vs. FSMUX - Dividend Comparison

AAMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.50%, more than FSMUX's 2.98% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AAMBX
Thrivent Municipal Bond Fund
3.50%4.65%3.93%2.58%2.97%2.66%2.80%3.35%3.45%3.40%3.41%3.39%
FSMUX
Strategic Advisers Municipal Bond Fund
2.98%3.26%3.74%3.18%2.14%0.99%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


AAMBX and FSMUX have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AAMBX has higher volatility (0.87%) compared to FSMUX (0.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAMBX dropped -49.18% vs FSMUX's -16.27%.

FSMUX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 2.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AAMBX and FSMUX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer