AUSM vs. GUMI

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

AUSM (Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF) and GUMI (Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AUSM returned 3.07% vs 2.96% for GUMI. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AUSM charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for GUMI.

Performance

AUSM vs. GUMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM) and Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with AUSM having a 1.46% return and GUMI slightly higher at 1.48%.

AUSM

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 0.30%
• 6M: 1.24%
• YTD: 1.46%
• 1Y: 3.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GUMI

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.24%
• 6M: 1.28%
• YTD: 1.48%
• 1Y: 2.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AUSM vs. GUMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF	1.46%	1.58%
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF	1.48%	1.66%

Correlation

The correlation between AUSM and GUMI is 0.09, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2025	0.10

Return for Risk

AUSM vs. GUMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUSM

AUSM Risk / Return Rank: 97
AUSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Omega Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AUSM Martin Ratio Rank: 95

GUMI

GUMI Risk / Return Rank: 96
GUMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
GUMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
GUMI Omega Ratio Rank: 95
GUMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
GUMI Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

AUSM vs. GUMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM) and Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI). 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.

	AUSM	GUMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.18	2.80	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.33	4.56	+2.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.38	1.61	+0.77
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.38	8.33	-0.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.86	36.12	-14.26

AUSM vs. GUMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUSM Sharpe Ratio is 4.18, which is higher than the GUMI Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUSM and GUMI, 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

AUSM vs. GUMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUSM drawdown since its inception was -0.42%, smaller than the maximum GUMI drawdown of -0.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUSM and GUMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUSM	GUMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.42%	-0.48%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.42%	-0.36%	-0.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-0.05%	-0.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.14%	0.08%	+0.06%

Volatility

AUSM vs. GUMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM) is 0.16%, while Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI) has a volatility of 0.19%. This indicates that AUSM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GUMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUSM	GUMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.16%	0.19%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.46%	0.49%	-0.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74%	1.06%	-0.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.74%	0.97%	-0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.74%	0.97%	-0.23%

AUSM vs. GUMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUSM has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than GUMI's 0.16% 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

AUSM vs. GUMI - Dividend Comparison

AUSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, less than GUMI's 2.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF	2.61%	1.26%	0.00%
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF	2.73%	2.95%	1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUSM and GUMI in my portfolio?

AUSM and GUMI have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AUSM or GUMI?

GUMI has higher volatility (0.19%) compared to AUSM (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUSM dropped -0.42% vs GUMI's -0.48%.

Which ETF is better, AUSM or GUMI?

On 1-year performance, AUSM leads with 3.07% vs 2.96% for GUMI. On fees, GUMI is cheaper at 0.16% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUSM or GUMI?

Over the 1-year period, AUSM has performed better with a 3.07% return vs 2.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUSM or GUMI?

GUMI is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for AUSM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUSM or GUMI?

GUMI has the higher dividend yield at 2.73%, compared with 2.61% for AUSM.

What is the main difference between AUSM and GUMI?

They also come from different issuers: Allspring and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for AUSM and 0.16% for GUMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs 2.80), 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.