BESF vs. CGMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BESF (Bastion Energy ETF) and CGMU (Capital Group Municipal Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BESF is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Bastion, while CGMU is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Capital Group. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BESF returned 61.61% vs 6.27% for CGMU. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. BESF charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for CGMU.

Performance

BESF vs. CGMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bastion Energy ETF (BESF) and Capital Group Municipal Income ETF (CGMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BESF achieves a 16.12% return, which is significantly higher than CGMU's 1.65% return.

BESF

• 1D: 1.01%
• 1M: -6.28%
• YTD: 16.12%
• 6M: 15.17%
• 1Y: 61.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGMU

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 1.15%
• YTD: 1.65%
• 6M: 1.75%
• 1Y: 6.27%
• 3Y*: 4.47%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BESF vs. CGMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BESF Bastion Energy ETF	16.12%	38.76%
CGMU Capital Group Municipal Income ETF	1.65%	5.26%

Correlation

The correlation between BESF and CGMU is -0.29, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	-0.30

Return for Risk

BESF vs. CGMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BESF

BESF Risk / Return Rank: 84
BESF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
BESF Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
BESF Omega Ratio Rank: 77
BESF Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BESF Martin Ratio Rank: 83

CGMU

CGMU Risk / Return Rank: 75
CGMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CGMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
CGMU Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CGMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
CGMU Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

BESF vs. CGMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bastion Energy ETF (BESF) and Capital Group Municipal Income ETF (CGMU). 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.

	BESF	CGMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.76	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.34	3.93	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.59	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.64	2.47	+3.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.57	7.84	+7.73

BESF vs. CGMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BESF Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the CGMU Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BESF and CGMU, 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

BESF vs. CGMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BESF drawdown since its inception was -10.97%, which is greater than CGMU's maximum drawdown of -4.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BESF and CGMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BESF	CGMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.97%	-4.11%	-6.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.97%	-2.55%	-8.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.73%	-0.64%	-8.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.74%	-0.84%	-1.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.97%	0.80%	+3.17%

Volatility

BESF vs. CGMU - Volatility Comparison

Bastion Energy ETF (BESF) has a higher volatility of 6.97% compared to Capital Group Municipal Income ETF (CGMU) at 0.62%. This indicates that BESF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BESF	CGMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.97%	0.62%	+6.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.93%	1.73%	+13.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.75%	2.28%	+22.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.39%	3.46%	+20.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.39%	3.46%	+20.93%

BESF vs. CGMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BESF has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than CGMU's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

BESF vs. CGMU - Dividend Comparison

BESF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, more than CGMU's 3.32% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BESF Bastion Energy ETF	5.86%	6.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CGMU Capital Group Municipal Income ETF	3.32%	3.32%	3.21%	3.08%	0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BESF and CGMU in my portfolio?

BESF and CGMU have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BESF or CGMU?

BESF has higher volatility (6.97%) compared to CGMU (0.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BESF dropped -10.97% vs CGMU's -4.11%.

Which ETF is better, BESF or CGMU?

On 1-year performance, BESF leads with 61.61% vs 6.27% for CGMU. On fees, CGMU is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, CGMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BESF or CGMU?

Over the 1-year period, BESF has performed better with a 61.61% return vs 6.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BESF or CGMU?

CGMU is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BESF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BESF or CGMU?

BESF has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 3.32% for CGMU.

What is the main difference between BESF and CGMU?

BESF is categorized as Energy Equities, while CGMU is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Bastion and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for BESF and 0.27% for CGMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.76 vs 2.52), 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.