BSMU vs. SPHQ
BSMU (Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF) and SPHQ (Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMU is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco Bulletshares Municipal Bond 2030 Index, while SPHQ is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BSMU returned -0.68%/yr vs 14.54%/yr for SPHQ. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSMU charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for SPHQ.
Performance
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSMU achieves a 0.56% return, which is significantly lower than SPHQ's 15.48% return.
BSMU
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 0.56%
- 6M
- 0.90%
- 1Y
- 5.50%
- 3Y*
- 3.02%
- 5Y*
- -0.68%
- 10Y*
- —
SPHQ
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 7.17%
- YTD
- 15.48%
- 6M
- 16.06%
- 1Y
- 23.22%
- 3Y*
- 22.41%
- 5Y*
- 14.54%
- 10Y*
- 15.01%
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.56% | 4.35% | -0.29% | 6.31% | -13.76% | 1.88% | 4.10% |
SPHQ Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF | 15.48% | 13.25% | 25.44% | 24.83% | -15.76% | 28.03% | 4.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSMU and SPHQ is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020 | 0.12 |
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BSMU
SPHQ
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
BSMU
SPHQ
Basic Materials
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Communication Services
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Consumer Cyclical
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Consumer Defensive
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Energy
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Healthcare
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Industrials
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Real Estate
BSMU
-
SPHQ
-
Technology
BSMU
-
SPHQ
Utilities
BSMU
-
SPHQ
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
BSMU vs. SPHQ — Risk / Return Rank
BSMU
SPHQ
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) and Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF (SPHQ). 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.
| BSMU | SPHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.32 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.68 | 2.62 | +0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.28 | 11.17 | -2.89 |
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
| BSMU | SPHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.59 | 1.85 | +0.74 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.14 | 0.89 | -1.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.84 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.06 | 0.53 | -0.47 |
Drawdowns
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSMU drawdown since its inception was -19.48%, smaller than the maximum SPHQ drawdown of -57.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMU and SPHQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSMU | SPHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.48% | -57.83% | +38.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.06% | -8.90% | +6.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.92% | -16.57% | +10.65% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.48% | -25.04% | +5.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.83% | 0.00% | -4.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.20% | -10.70% | +2.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.67% | 2.08% | -1.41% |
Volatility
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) is 0.79%, while Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF (SPHQ) has a volatility of 3.49%. This indicates that BSMU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSMU | SPHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.79% | 3.49% | -2.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.48% | 10.18% | -8.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.13% | 12.62% | -10.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.83% | 16.45% | -11.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.85% | 17.86% | -13.01% |
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSMU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than SPHQ's 0.15% 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
BSMU vs. SPHQ - Dividend Comparison
BSMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.80%, more than SPHQ's 1.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.80% | 2.82% | 2.92% | 2.66% | 2.16% | 1.60% | 0.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SPHQ Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF | 1.04% | 1.09% | 1.15% | 1.42% | 1.85% | 1.19% | 1.55% | 1.51% | 1.85% | 1.57% | 1.67% | 2.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSMU and SPHQ have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SPHQ has higher volatility (3.49%) compared to BSMU (0.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSMU dropped -19.48% vs SPHQ's -57.83%.
On 5-year performance, SPHQ leads with 14.54% vs -0.68% for BSMU. On fees, SPHQ is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BSMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, SPHQ has performed better with a 14.54% return vs -0.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SPHQ is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for BSMU.
BSMU has the higher dividend yield at 2.80%, compared with 1.04% for SPHQ.
BSMU is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while SPHQ is S&P 500. BSMU tracks Invesco Bulletshares Municipal Bond 2030 Index, while SPHQ tracks S&P 500 Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMU and 0.15% for SPHQ.
BSMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.85), 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.
Find the right allocation for BSMU and SPHQ
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