BSMV vs. MFUT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BSMV (Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF) and MFUT (Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMV is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares Municipal Bond 2031 Index, while MFUT is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Cambria. BSMV is passively managed, while MFUT is actively managed. Over the past year, BSMV returned 5.86% vs 38.04% for MFUT. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. BSMV charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.18%/yr for MFUT.

Performance

BSMV vs. MFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSMV achieves a 0.64% return, which is significantly lower than MFUT's 22.38% return.

BSMV

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 0.32%
• YTD: 0.64%
• 6M: 1.16%
• 1Y: 5.86%
• 3Y*: 3.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MFUT

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: 4.71%
• YTD: 22.38%
• 6M: 26.08%
• 1Y: 38.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSMV vs. MFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BSMV Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF	0.64%	4.03%	2.94%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	22.38%	-1.83%	-16.68%

Correlation

The correlation between BSMV and MFUT 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 May 30, 2024	-0.05

Return for Risk

BSMV vs. MFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSMV

BSMV Risk / Return Rank: 61
BSMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
BSMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
BSMV Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BSMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
BSMV Martin Ratio Rank: 39

MFUT

MFUT Risk / Return Rank: 78
MFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
MFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
MFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
MFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

BSMV vs. MFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT). 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.

	BSMV	MFUT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	2.64	-0.30
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.52	3.22	+0.30
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.52	-0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.03	4.14	-2.11
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.34	13.37	-7.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BSMV vs. MFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSMV Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the MFUT Sharpe Ratio of 2.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSMV and MFUT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BSMV	MFUT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	2.64	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.19	0.00	-0.19

Drawdowns

BSMV vs. MFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSMV drawdown since its inception was -20.68%, smaller than the maximum MFUT drawdown of -29.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMV and MFUT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSMV	MFUT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.68%	-29.28%	+8.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.79%	-9.23%	+6.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.46%	-0.56%	-4.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.45%	-16.60%	+6.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	2.85%	-1.95%

Volatility

BSMV vs. MFUT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMV) is 0.82%, while Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that BSMV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MFUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSMV	MFUT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	3.55%	-2.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.80%	12.65%	-10.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52%	14.47%	-11.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.69%	13.38%	-7.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.69%	13.38%	-7.69%

BSMV vs. MFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSMV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUT's 1.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSMV vs. MFUT - Dividend Comparison

BSMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, while MFUT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BSMV Invesco BulletShares 2031 Municipal Bond ETF	2.90%	2.93%	3.10%	2.59%	2.21%	0.24%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSMV and MFUT in my portfolio?

BSMV and MFUT 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, BSMV or MFUT?

MFUT has higher volatility (3.55%) compared to BSMV (0.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSMV dropped -20.68% vs MFUT's -29.28%.

Which ETF is better, BSMV or MFUT?

On 1-year performance, MFUT leads with 38.04% vs 5.86% for BSMV. On fees, BSMV is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMV has been the lower-risk option at 0.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSMV or MFUT?

Over the 1-year period, MFUT has performed better with a 38.04% return vs 5.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSMV or MFUT?

BSMV is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.18% for MFUT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSMV or MFUT?

BSMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.90%, compared with 0.00% for MFUT.

What is the main difference between BSMV and MFUT?

BSMV is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while MFUT is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMV and 1.18% for MFUT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 2.34), 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.