CA vs. CMF
CA (Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF) and CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - CA tracks the ICE AMT-Free Broad Liquid California Municipal Index while CMF tracks the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CA returned 6.72% vs 5.67% for CMF. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CA charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for CMF.
Performance
CA vs. CMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CA achieves a 1.20% return, which is significantly higher than CMF's 0.20% return.
CA
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.89%
- YTD
- 1.20%
- 1Y
- 6.72%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.51%
CMF
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -1.25%
- 6M
- -0.35%
- YTD
- 0.20%
- 1Y
- 5.67%
- 3Y*
- 2.73%
- 5Y*
- 0.38%
- 10Y*
- 1.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.23%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $4.72K | |
| $30.16M | $27.02M | $27.15M |
CA vs. CMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF | 1.20% | 3.05% | 1.51% | 0.79% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 0.20% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 1.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CA and CMF is 0.55, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2023 | 0.64 |
The correlation between CA and CMF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
CA vs. CMF — Risk / Return Rank
CA
CMF
CA vs. CMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF). 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.
| CA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.75 | 1.43 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.63 | 1.95 | +0.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.55 | 6.12 | +3.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CA vs. CMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CA drawdown since its inception was -5.24%, smaller than the maximum CMF drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CA and CMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.24% | -16.45% | +11.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.57% | -2.91% | +0.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.22% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.57% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.75% | -1.66% | +0.91% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.24% | -4.74% | +3.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.70% | 0.93% | -0.23% |
Volatility
CA vs. CMF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA) is 0.00%, while iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) has a volatility of 0.86%. This indicates that CA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 0.86% | -0.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.73% | 2.27% | -0.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.38% | 2.87% | -0.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.87% | 4.21% | -0.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.87% | 5.08% | -1.21% |
CA vs. CMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CA has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CMF's 0.08% 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
CA vs. CMF - Dividend Comparison
CA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, less than CMF's 2.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF | 2.69% | 3.14% | 3.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.98% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CA and CMF have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMF has higher volatility (0.86%) compared to CA (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CA dropped -5.24% vs CMF's -16.45%.
On 1-year performance, CA leads with 6.72% vs 5.67% for CMF. On fees, CMF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, CA has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CA has performed better with a 6.72% return vs 5.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CA.
CMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 2.69% for CA.
CA tracks ICE AMT-Free Broad Liquid California Municipal Index, while CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CA and 0.08% for CMF.
CA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.84 vs 1.99), 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 CA and CMF
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