CMF vs. MBB
CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) and MBB (iShares MBS Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while MBB is a Mortgage Backed Securities fund tracking the Barclays Capital U.S. MBS Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CMF returned 1.75%/yr vs 1.30%/yr for MBB. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CMF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for MBB.
Performance
CMF vs. MBB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CMF achieves a 0.96% return, which is significantly higher than MBB's 0.58% return. Over the past 10 years, CMF has outperformed MBB with an annualized return of 1.75%, while MBB has yielded a comparatively lower 1.30% annualized return.
CMF
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- 0.96%
- 6M
- 1.33%
- 1Y
- 6.72%
- 3Y*
- 3.31%
- 5Y*
- 0.66%
- 10Y*
- 1.75%
MBB
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 0.58%
- 6M
- 0.71%
- 1Y
- 6.76%
- 3Y*
- 4.36%
- 5Y*
- 0.34%
- 10Y*
- 1.30%
CMF vs. MBB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 0.96% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
MBB iShares MBS Bond ETF | 0.58% | 8.38% | 1.31% | 5.01% | -11.74% | -1.43% | 4.08% | 6.18% | 0.82% | 2.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between CMF and MBB is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2007 | 0.43 |
Over the past year, CMF and MBB have become more correlated (0.65) than their long-term average of 0.43, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. MBB — Risk / Return Rank
CMF
MBB
CMF vs. MBB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) and iShares MBS Bond ETF (MBB). 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.
| CMF | MBB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.27 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.32 | 2.31 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.79 | 7.64 | +0.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CMF | MBB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41 | 1.51 | +0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 | 0.05 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.35 | 0.25 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.58 | -0.19 |
Drawdowns
CMF vs. MBB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CMF drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum MBB drawdown of -17.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMF and MBB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CMF | MBB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.45% | -17.64% | +1.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.91% | -2.94% | +0.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.22% | -7.68% | +2.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.45% | -17.19% | +4.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.57% | -17.64% | +3.07% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.92% | -1.52% | +0.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.77% | -2.35% | -2.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.86% | 0.89% | -0.03% |
Volatility
CMF vs. MBB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) is 0.85%, while iShares MBS Bond ETF (MBB) has a volatility of 1.59%. This indicates that CMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MBB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CMF | MBB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.85% | 1.59% | -0.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.11% | 3.23% | -1.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.80% | 4.51% | -1.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.19% | 6.81% | -2.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.08% | 5.31% | -0.23% |
CMF vs. MBB - Expense Ratio Comparison
CMF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than MBB's 0.06% 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
CMF vs. MBB - Dividend Comparison
CMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, less than MBB's 4.28% yield.
| 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% |
MBB iShares MBS Bond ETF | 4.28% | 4.21% | 3.94% | 3.40% | 2.31% | 1.05% | 2.10% | 2.77% | 2.64% | 2.23% | 2.58% | 2.66% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CMF and MBB have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MBB has higher volatility (1.59%) compared to CMF (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CMF dropped -16.45% vs MBB's -17.64%.
On 10-year performance, CMF leads with 1.75% vs 1.30% for MBB. On fees, MBB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CMF has performed better with a 1.75% return vs 1.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MBB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CMF.
MBB has the higher dividend yield at 4.28%, compared with 2.95% for CMF.
CMF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while MBB is Mortgage Backed Securities. CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while MBB tracks Barclays Capital U.S. MBS Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CMF and 0.06% for MBB.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.51), 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 MBB
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