CMF vs. GSG
CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMF returned 1.55%/yr vs 8.91%/yr for GSG. Their -0.06 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CMF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
CMF vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMF achieves a -0.17% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 38.94% return. Over the past 10 years, CMF has underperformed GSG with an annualized return of 1.55%, while GSG has yielded a comparatively higher 8.91% annualized return.
CMF
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -1.82%
- 6M
- -0.93%
- YTD
- -0.17%
- 1Y
- 4.37%
- 3Y*
- 2.68%
- 5Y*
- 0.31%
- 10Y*
- 1.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.21%
GSG
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 12.94%
- 6M
- 25.75%
- YTD
- 38.94%
- 1Y
- 42.34%
- 3Y*
- 14.13%
- 5Y*
- 14.47%
- 10Y*
- 8.91%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.13%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29.81M | $26.50M | $27.09M | |
| $16.60M | $17.31M | $26.52M |
CMF vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | -0.17% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 38.94% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMF and GSG is -0.32, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.14 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.07 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2007 | -0.06 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between CMF and GSG has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.06 to -0.32, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
CMF
GSG
CMF vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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 | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.29 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.73 | 2.16 | -0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.29 | 6.99 | -1.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CMF vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMF drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMF and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMF | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.45% | -89.62% | +73.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.91% | -18.81% | +15.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.22% | -18.81% | +13.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.40% | -29.12% | +16.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.57% | -57.64% | +43.07% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.03% | -58.05% | +56.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.74% | -63.67% | +58.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.95% | 5.84% | -4.89% |
Volatility
CMF vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) is 0.86%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 8.11%. This indicates that CMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMF | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.86% | 8.11% | -7.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.28% | 22.18% | -19.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.86% | 24.23% | -21.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.21% | 22.86% | -18.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.08% | 22.06% | -16.98% |
CMF vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CMF vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
CMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.99%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.74% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CMF and GSG have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (8.11%) compared to CMF (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMF dropped -16.45% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 10-year performance, GSG leads with 8.91% vs 1.55% for CMF. On fees, CMF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GSG has performed better with a 8.91% return vs 1.55%. 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 0.75% for GSG.
CMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.74%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
CMF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while GSG is Commodities. CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for CMF and 0.75% for GSG.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.68), 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 GSG
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