PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FTMN vs. AUSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FTMN vs. AUSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTMN achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly higher than AUSM's 0.98% return.


FTMN

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.55%
YTD
1.52%
6M
2.03%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

AUSM

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.21%
YTD
0.98%
6M
1.34%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTMN vs. AUSM - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FTMN and AUSM is 0.12, 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 Nov 11, 2025

0.12

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

FTMN vs. AUSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Minnesota Municipal Income ETF (FTMN) 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

FTMN vs. AUSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FTMNAUSMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.94

3.98

-3.03

Drawdowns

FTMN vs. AUSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTMN drawdown since its inception was -3.10%, which is greater than AUSM's maximum drawdown of -0.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMN and AUSM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTMNAUSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.10%

-0.42%

-2.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.41%

-0.02%

-0.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.71%

-0.09%

-0.62%

Volatility

FTMN vs. AUSM - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FTMNAUSMDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.14%

0.73%

+3.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.14%

0.73%

+3.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.14%

0.73%

+3.41%

FTMN vs. AUSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTMN has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than AUSM's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

FTMN vs. AUSM - Dividend Comparison

FTMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than AUSM's 2.39% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


FTMN and AUSM have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, AUSM is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

AUSM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FTMN.

AUSM has the higher dividend yield at 2.39%, compared with 1.83% for FTMN.

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Allspring. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMN and 0.18% for AUSM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FTMN 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