BSMQ vs. ZMUN
BSMQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF) and ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - BSMQ tracks the Invesco BulletShares Municipal Bond 2026 Index while ZMUN tracks the Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZMUN.
Performance
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSMQ achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than ZMUN's 1.57% return.
BSMQ
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 1.17%
- 1Y
- 3.08%
- 3Y*
- 2.92%
- 5Y*
- 0.29%
- 10Y*
- —
ZMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.73% | 0.74% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 1.57% | 0.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSMQ and ZMUN is 0.06, 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 1, 2025 | 0.06 |
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
BSMQ vs. ZMUN — Risk / Return Rank
BSMQ
ZMUN
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMQ) and F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN). 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.
| BSMQ | ZMUN | 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 | 9.43 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.69 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BSMQ | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 6.46 | -6.21 |
Drawdowns
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSMQ drawdown since its inception was -13.18%, which is greater than ZMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMQ and ZMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSMQ | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.18% | -0.09% | -13.09% |
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 | -0.12% | -0.02% | -0.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.48% | -0.01% | -3.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.12% | — | — |
Volatility
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSMQ | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.39% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.94% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33% | 0.54% | +0.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.68% | 0.54% | +2.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.79% | 0.54% | +4.25% |
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ZMUN's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
BSMQ vs. ZMUN - Dividend Comparison
BSMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, more than ZMUN's 2.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.76% | 2.74% | 2.75% | 2.47% | 1.60% | 1.14% | 1.57% | 0.44% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 2.28% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSMQ and ZMUN have a correlation of 0.06, 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 0.30% for ZMUN.
BSMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 2.28% for ZMUN.
BSMQ tracks Invesco BulletShares Municipal Bond 2026 Index, while ZMUN tracks Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMQ and 0.30% for ZMUN.
Find the right allocation for BSMQ and ZMUN
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