BSMU vs. FBDC

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

BSMU (Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF) and FBDC (FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMU is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco Bulletshares Municipal Bond 2030 Index, while FBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. BSMU is passively managed, while FBDC is actively managed. Over the past year, BSMU returned 4.23% vs -12.28% for FBDC. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSMU charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for FBDC.

Performance

BSMU vs. FBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSMU achieves a 0.84% return, which is significantly higher than FBDC's -6.34% return.

BSMU

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.26%
• 6M: 0.28%
• YTD: 0.84%
• 1Y: 4.23%
• 3Y*: 2.76%
• 5Y*: -0.86%
• 10Y*: —

FBDC

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: 1.52%
• 6M: -5.96%
• YTD: -6.34%
• 1Y: -12.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSMU vs. FBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF	0.84%	3.93%
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	-6.34%	-2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between BSMU and FBDC is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2025	0.09

Return for Risk

BSMU vs. FBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSMU

BSMU Risk / Return Rank: 70
BSMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BSMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
BSMU Omega Ratio Rank: 88
BSMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BSMU Martin Ratio Rank: 45

FBDC

FBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
FBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

BSMU vs. FBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). 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.

	BSMU	FBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	-0.69	+2.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	-0.89	+3.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	0.90	+0.53
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	-0.60	+2.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.92	-1.01	+6.93

BSMU vs. FBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSMU Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is higher than the FBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSMU and FBDC, 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

BSMU vs. FBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSMU drawdown since its inception was -19.48%, smaller than the maximum FBDC drawdown of -20.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMU and FBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSMU	FBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.48%	-20.60%	+1.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.06%	-20.60%	+18.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.56%	-14.34%	+9.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.13%	-10.72%	+2.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.72%	12.18%	-11.46%

Volatility

BSMU vs. FBDC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) is 0.58%, while FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC) has a volatility of 4.23%. This indicates that BSMU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSMU	FBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.58%	4.23%	-3.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.54%	14.48%	-12.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.11%	17.97%	-15.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.81%	17.83%	-13.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.80%	17.83%	-13.03%

BSMU vs. FBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSMU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FBDC's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSMU vs. FBDC - Dividend Comparison

BSMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than FBDC's 12.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF	2.79%	2.82%	2.92%	2.66%	2.16%	1.60%	0.28%
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	12.27%	5.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSMU and FBDC in my portfolio?

BSMU and FBDC have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BSMU or FBDC?

FBDC has higher volatility (4.23%) compared to BSMU (0.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSMU dropped -19.48% vs FBDC's -20.60%.

Which ETF is better, BSMU or FBDC?

On 1-year performance, BSMU leads with 4.23% vs -12.28% for FBDC. On fees, BSMU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSMU or FBDC?

Over the 1-year period, BSMU has performed better with a 4.23% return vs -12.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSMU or FBDC?

BSMU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for FBDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSMU or FBDC?

FBDC has the higher dividend yield at 12.27%, compared with 2.79% for BSMU.

What is the main difference between BSMU and FBDC?

BSMU is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FBDC is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMU and 1.35% for FBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs -0.69), 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.