CMF vs. IAU
CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) and IAU (iShares Gold Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMF returned 1.65%/yr vs 11.76%/yr for IAU. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.
Performance
CMF vs. IAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMF achieves a 1.21% return, which is significantly higher than IAU's -4.73% return. Over the past 10 years, CMF has underperformed IAU with an annualized return of 1.65%, while IAU has yielded a comparatively higher 11.76% annualized return.
CMF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 1.32%
- YTD
- 1.21%
- 6M
- 1.33%
- 1Y
- 6.50%
- 3Y*
- 3.12%
- 5Y*
- 0.72%
- 10Y*
- 1.65%
IAU
- 1D
- -1.87%
- 1M
- -8.82%
- YTD
- -4.73%
- 6M
- -8.68%
- 1Y
- 21.45%
- 3Y*
- 28.61%
- 5Y*
- 18.02%
- 10Y*
- 11.76%
CMF vs. IAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 1.21% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
IAU iShares Gold Trust | -4.73% | 63.95% | 26.85% | 12.84% | -0.63% | -4.00% | 25.03% | 17.98% | -1.76% | 12.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMF and IAU is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2007 | 0.15 |
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. IAU — Risk / Return Rank
CMF
IAU
CMF vs. IAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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 | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.17 | +0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 0.88 | +1.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.36 | 2.37 | +4.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CMF vs. IAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMF drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum IAU drawdown of -45.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMF and IAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMF | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.45% | -45.14% | +28.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.91% | -24.40% | +21.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.22% | -24.40% | +19.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.45% | -24.40% | +11.95% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.57% | -24.40% | +9.83% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.68% | -23.87% | +23.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.76% | -15.97% | +11.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.88% | 9.07% | -8.19% |
Volatility
CMF vs. IAU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) is 0.72%, while iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that CMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMF | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.72% | 8.10% | -7.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.17% | 24.23% | -22.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.77% | 27.38% | -24.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.19% | 18.18% | -13.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.08% | 15.98% | -10.90% |
CMF vs. IAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CMF and IAU have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
CMF vs. IAU - Dividend Comparison
CMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, while IAU 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 | 2.95% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
IAU iShares Gold 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 IAU have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IAU has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to CMF (0.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMF dropped -16.45% vs IAU's -45.14%.
On 10-year performance, IAU leads with 11.76% vs 1.65% for CMF. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IAU has performed better with a 11.76% return vs 1.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMF and IAU have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.
CMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.00% for IAU.
CMF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while IAU is Gold. CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IAU tracks LBMA Gold Price.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 0.79), 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 IAU
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