CGHM vs. RMOP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CGHM (Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF) and RMOP (Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF) are both High Yield Muni funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGHM returned 8.87% vs 9.29% for RMOP. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGHM charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for RMOP.

Performance

CGHM vs. RMOP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM) and Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGHM achieves a 3.08% return, which is significantly lower than RMOP's 3.85% return.

CGHM

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.86%
• YTD: 3.08%
• 6M: 3.34%
• 1Y: 8.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RMOP

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 2.28%
• YTD: 3.85%
• 6M: 4.10%
• 1Y: 9.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGHM vs. RMOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	3.08%	4.56%	0.67%
RMOP Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF	3.85%	3.90%	2.55%

Correlation

The correlation between CGHM and RMOP is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 13, 2024	0.75

The correlation between CGHM and RMOP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGHM vs. RMOP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGHM

CGHM Risk / Return Rank: 86
CGHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CGHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CGHM Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CGHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CGHM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

RMOP

RMOP Risk / Return Rank: 82
RMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
RMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
RMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
RMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
RMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

CGHM vs. RMOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM) and Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP). 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.

	CGHM	RMOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.87	2.48	+0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.22	3.71	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.50	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	3.51	-0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.55	12.59	+0.96

CGHM vs. RMOP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGHM Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is comparable to the RMOP Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGHM and RMOP, 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

CGHM vs. RMOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGHM drawdown since its inception was -5.90%, smaller than the maximum RMOP drawdown of -6.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGHM and RMOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGHM	RMOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.90%	-6.67%	+0.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.55%	-2.66%	+0.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	-0.14%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.21%	-1.48%	+0.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.66%	0.74%	-0.08%

Volatility

CGHM vs. RMOP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM) is 0.74%, while Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP) has a volatility of 0.95%. This indicates that CGHM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RMOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGHM	RMOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.74%	0.95%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.23%	2.67%	-0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.11%	3.76%	-0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.47%	5.59%	-1.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.47%	5.59%	-1.12%

CGHM vs. RMOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGHM has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than RMOP's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGHM vs. RMOP - Dividend Comparison

CGHM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, less than RMOP's 5.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	3.79%	3.61%	1.78%
RMOP Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF	5.18%	5.15%	1.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGHM and RMOP in my portfolio?

CGHM and RMOP have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGHM or RMOP?

RMOP has higher volatility (0.95%) compared to CGHM (0.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGHM dropped -5.90% vs RMOP's -6.67%.

Which ETF is better, CGHM or RMOP?

On 1-year performance, RMOP leads with 9.29% vs 8.87% for CGHM. On fees, CGHM is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, CGHM has been the lower-risk option at 0.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGHM or RMOP?

Over the 1-year period, RMOP has performed better with a 9.29% return vs 8.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGHM or RMOP?

CGHM is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMOP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGHM or RMOP?

RMOP has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 3.79% for CGHM.

What is the main difference between CGHM and RMOP?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Rockefeller. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for CGHM and 0.55% for RMOP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.48), 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.