AMUN vs. ILS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AMUN is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by abrdn, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. AMUN charges 0.25%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

AMUN vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMUN achieves a 1.25% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 2.27% return.

AMUN

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 1.25%
• 6M: 1.32%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILS

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 2.27%
• 6M: 2.63%
• 1Y: 7.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AMUN vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF	1.25%	0.14%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	2.27%	0.89%

Correlation

The correlation between AMUN and ILS is -0.11, 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	-0.11

Return for Risk

AMUN vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMUN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 96
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS 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.

AMUN vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.06	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	5.05	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.69	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	14.18	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	52.13	—

Drawdowns

AMUN vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMUN drawdown since its inception was -0.61%, smaller than the maximum ILS drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUN and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMUN	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-2.46%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-0.54%	+0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.15%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AMUN	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.84%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	1.68%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98%	2.58%	-1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.98%	3.77%	-2.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.98%	3.77%	-2.79%

AMUN vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMUN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMUN vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

AMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, less than ILS's 8.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF	1.88%	0.66%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.05%	6.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMUN and ILS in my portfolio?

AMUN and ILS have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AMUN or ILS?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMUN or ILS?

AMUN is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMUN or ILS?

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.05%, compared with 1.88% for AMUN.

What is the main difference between AMUN and ILS?

AMUN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMUN and 1.58% for ILS.