AMUN vs. BSMQ
AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) and BSMQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. AMUN is actively managed, while BSMQ is passively managed. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMUN charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for BSMQ.
Performance
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMUN achieves a 1.21% return, which is significantly higher than BSMQ's 0.96% return.
AMUN
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.21%
- 6M
- 1.32%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSMQ
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 0.96%
- 6M
- 1.16%
- 1Y
- 3.03%
- 3Y*
- 2.78%
- 5Y*
- 0.38%
- 10Y*
- —
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.21% | 0.14% |
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.96% | 0.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMUN and BSMQ is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2025 | 0.04 |
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
AMUN vs. BSMQ — Risk / Return Rank
AMUN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BSMQ
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMQ). 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.
| AMUN | BSMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.48 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 9.28 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 24.53 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMUN drawdown since its inception was -0.61%, smaller than the maximum BSMQ drawdown of -13.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUN and BSMQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMUN | BSMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.61% | -13.18% | +12.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.33% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -2.53% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -11.50% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.07% | +0.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.08% | -3.45% | +3.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.12% | — |
Volatility
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMUN | BSMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.38% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.96% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98% | 1.31% | -0.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.98% | 2.67% | -1.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.98% | 4.77% | -3.79% |
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMUN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMQ's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
AMUN vs. BSMQ - Dividend Comparison
AMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, less than BSMQ's 2.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.88% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.99% | 2.74% | 2.75% | 2.47% | 1.60% | 1.14% | 1.57% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AMUN and BSMQ have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BSMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BSMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMUN.
BSMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.99%, compared with 1.88% for AMUN.
They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMUN and 0.18% for BSMQ.
Find the right allocation for AMUN and BSMQ
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