CMF vs. ACWI
CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMF returned 1.66%/yr vs 13.32%/yr for ACWI. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. CMF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.
Performance
CMF vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMF achieves a 1.28% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.10% return. Over the past 10 years, CMF has underperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 1.66%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively higher 13.32% annualized return.
CMF
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 1.39%
- YTD
- 1.28%
- 6M
- 1.51%
- 1Y
- 6.61%
- 3Y*
- 3.14%
- 5Y*
- 0.75%
- 10Y*
- 1.66%
ACWI
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 1.68%
- YTD
- 12.10%
- 6M
- 11.90%
- 1Y
- 29.31%
- 3Y*
- 20.81%
- 5Y*
- 11.34%
- 10Y*
- 13.32%
CMF vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 1.28% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 12.10% | 22.41% | 17.45% | 22.27% | -18.39% | 18.66% | 16.34% | 26.59% | -9.19% | 24.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMF and ACWI is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2008 | -0.03 |
The correlation between CMF and ACWI shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (all time) to 0.34 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CMF vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank
CMF
ACWI
CMF vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.
| CMF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.40 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 3.03 | -0.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.50 | 13.22 | -5.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CMF vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMF drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMF and ACWI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.45% | -56.00% | +39.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.91% | -9.73% | +6.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.22% | -16.55% | +11.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.45% | -26.42% | +13.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.57% | -33.53% | +18.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.61% | -0.85% | +0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.76% | -8.59% | +3.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.88% | 2.22% | -1.34% |
Volatility
CMF vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) is 0.71%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that CMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.71% | 5.16% | -4.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.17% | 11.20% | -9.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.77% | 13.50% | -10.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.19% | 16.17% | -11.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.08% | 17.15% | -12.07% |
CMF vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMF vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison
CMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.94%, more than ACWI's 1.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 1.42% | 1.55% | 1.70% | 1.88% | 1.79% | 1.71% | 1.43% | 2.33% | 2.18% | 1.94% | 2.19% | 2.56% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.94% | 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
CMF and ACWI have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACWI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to CMF (0.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMF dropped -16.45% vs ACWI's -56.00%.
On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 13.32% vs 1.66% for CMF. On fees, CMF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 13.32% return vs 1.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.
CMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.94%, compared with 1.42% for ACWI.
CMF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while ACWI is Global Equities. CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CMF and 0.32% for ACWI.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.18), 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 CMF and ACWI
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