PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCAL vs. BSMR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCAL vs. BSMR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL) and Invesco BulletShares 2027 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCAL achieves a 1.83% return, which is significantly higher than BSMR's 0.93% return.


FCAL

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.71%
YTD
1.83%
6M
2.29%
1Y
6.71%
3Y*
3.67%
5Y*
0.80%
10Y*

BSMR

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.23%
YTD
0.93%
6M
1.19%
1Y
3.90%
3Y*
2.93%
5Y*
0.45%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCAL vs. BSMR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FCAL
First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF
1.83%3.19%1.90%6.08%-9.50%3.26%3.51%0.80%
BSMR
Invesco BulletShares 2027 Municipal Bond ETF
0.93%3.10%1.51%4.47%-7.60%1.09%4.97%0.16%

Correlation

The correlation between FCAL and BSMR is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.45

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2019

0.48

The correlation between FCAL and BSMR shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.54 (5 years), 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

FCAL vs. BSMR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FCAL
FCAL Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
FCAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCAL Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
FCAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCAL Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

BSMR
BSMR Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
BSMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BSMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
BSMR Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
BSMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
BSMR Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FCAL vs. BSMR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL) and Invesco BulletShares 2027 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMR). 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.


FCALBSMRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.68

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.62

6.93

-4.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.82

21.96

-12.15

FCAL vs. BSMR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the BSMR Sharpe Ratio of 3.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCAL and BSMR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FCALBSMRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.49

3.12

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

0.15

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.21

+0.28

Drawdowns

FCAL vs. BSMR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCAL drawdown since its inception was -14.81%, which is greater than BSMR's maximum drawdown of -13.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCAL and BSMR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCALBSMRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.81%

-13.49%

-1.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.57%

-0.57%

-2.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.46%

-3.50%

-1.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.44%

-12.02%

-2.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

-0.11%

-0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.35%

-3.49%

+0.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.69%

0.18%

+0.51%

Volatility

FCAL vs. BSMR - Volatility Comparison

First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL) has a higher volatility of 0.96% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2027 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMR) at 0.37%. This indicates that FCAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSMR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCALBSMRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.96%

0.37%

+0.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.12%

0.93%

+1.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.72%

1.26%

+1.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.25%

3.03%

+1.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.25%

5.72%

-0.47%

FCAL vs. BSMR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCAL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMR's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCAL vs. BSMR - Dividend Comparison

FCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.33%, more than BSMR's 2.72% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
BSMR
Invesco BulletShares 2027 Municipal Bond ETF
2.72%2.77%2.78%2.72%1.40%1.00%1.49%0.45%0.00%0.00%
FCAL
First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF
3.33%3.22%2.99%2.74%2.38%2.03%2.11%2.68%2.99%1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCAL and BSMR have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCAL has higher volatility (0.96%) compared to BSMR (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCAL dropped -14.81% vs BSMR's -13.49%.

On 5-year performance, FCAL leads with 0.80% vs 0.45% for BSMR. On fees, BSMR is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FCAL has performed better with a 0.80% return vs 0.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BSMR is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FCAL.

FCAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.33%, compared with 2.72% for BSMR.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FCAL and 0.18% for BSMR.

BSMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 2.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCAL and BSMR

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