DFNM vs. AUSM
DFNM (Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF) and AUSM (Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DFNM charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AUSM.
Performance
DFNM vs. AUSM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DFNM achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly higher than AUSM's 1.00% return.
DFNM
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.27%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 5.31%
- 3Y*
- 3.39%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AUSM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 1.36%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DFNM vs. AUSM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DFNM Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF | 1.27% | 3.24% |
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF | 1.00% | 1.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between DFNM and AUSM is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2025 | 0.13 |
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
DFNM vs. AUSM — Risk / Return Rank
DFNM
AUSM
DFNM vs. AUSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF (DFNM) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). 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.
| DFNM | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.04 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.41 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.69 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.77 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.07 | — | — |
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
| DFNM | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.04 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.57 | 4.02 | -3.45 |
Drawdowns
DFNM vs. AUSM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DFNM drawdown since its inception was -6.99%, which is greater than AUSM's maximum drawdown of -0.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFNM and AUSM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DFNM | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.99% | -0.42% | -6.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.84% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.82% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.38% | 0.00% | -0.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.96% | -0.09% | -1.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.50% | — | — |
Volatility
DFNM vs. AUSM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DFNM | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.59% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.29% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.77% | 0.73% | +1.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.54% | 0.73% | +1.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.54% | 0.73% | +1.81% |
DFNM vs. AUSM - Expense Ratio Comparison
DFNM has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than AUSM's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
DFNM vs. AUSM - Dividend Comparison
DFNM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.89%, more than AUSM's 2.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF | 2.39% | 1.26% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
DFNM Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF | 2.89% | 2.94% | 2.74% | 2.39% | 1.16% | 0.05% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DFNM and AUSM have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, DFNM is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
DFNM is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for AUSM.
DFNM has the higher dividend yield at 2.89%, compared with 2.39% for AUSM.
They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Allspring. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for DFNM and 0.18% for AUSM.
Find the right allocation for DFNM and AUSM
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