AMUN vs. CHAU
AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) and CHAU (Direxion Daily CSI 300 China A Share Bull 2x Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - AMUN is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by abrdn, while CHAU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index (200%). AMUN is actively managed, while CHAU is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. AMUN charges 0.25%/yr vs 1.21%/yr for CHAU.
Performance
AMUN vs. CHAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMUN achieves a 1.25% return, which is significantly lower than CHAU's 15.68% return.
AMUN
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 1.25%
- 6M
- 1.32%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CHAU
- 1D
- -6.92%
- 1M
- 2.59%
- YTD
- 15.68%
- 6M
- 16.43%
- 1Y
- 74.53%
- 3Y*
- 14.03%
- 5Y*
- -8.64%
- 10Y*
- 5.49%
AMUN vs. CHAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.25% | 0.14% |
CHAU Direxion Daily CSI 300 China A Share Bull 2x Shares | 15.68% | 7.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMUN and CHAU is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2025 | -0.12 |
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. CHAU — Risk / Return Rank
AMUN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CHAU
AMUN vs. CHAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and Direxion Daily CSI 300 China A Share Bull 2x Shares (CHAU). 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 | CHAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.35 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.91 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 13.77 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMUN vs. CHAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMUN drawdown since its inception was -0.61%, smaller than the maximum CHAU drawdown of -79.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUN and CHAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMUN | CHAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.61% | -79.21% | +78.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -15.27% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -59.88% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -72.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -78.58% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -53.31% | +53.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.08% | -58.86% | +58.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 5.43% | — |
Volatility
AMUN vs. CHAU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMUN | CHAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 14.72% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 25.68% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98% | 35.51% | -34.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.98% | 47.32% | -46.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.98% | 47.22% | -46.24% |
AMUN vs. CHAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMUN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CHAU's 1.21% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMUN vs. CHAU - Dividend Comparison
AMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, more than CHAU's 1.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.88% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CHAU Direxion Daily CSI 300 China A Share Bull 2x Shares | 1.76% | 1.97% | 2.25% | 3.97% | 0.77% | 1.73% | 0.09% | 0.58% | 0.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AMUN and CHAU have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AMUN is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AMUN is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.21% for CHAU.
AMUN has the higher dividend yield at 1.88%, compared with 1.76% for CHAU.
AMUN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while CHAU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMUN and 1.21% for CHAU.
Find the right allocation for AMUN and CHAU
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