FTOH vs. RVNU
FTOH (Franklin Ohio Municipal Income ETF) and RVNU (Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - FTOH tracks the Actively Managed while RVNU tracks the Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FTOH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for RVNU.
Performance
FTOH vs. RVNU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTOH achieves a 2.55% return, which is significantly lower than RVNU's 4.58% return.
FTOH
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- 6M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 2.55%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RVNU
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.86%
- 6M
- 3.70%
- YTD
- 4.58%
- 1Y
- 10.18%
- 3Y*
- 3.70%
- 5Y*
- -0.31%
- 10Y*
- 1.74%
FTOH vs. RVNU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTOH Franklin Ohio Municipal Income ETF | 2.55% | 0.08% |
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 4.58% | -0.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTOH and RVNU is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2025 | 0.57 |
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
FTOH vs. RVNU — Risk / Return Rank
FTOH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
RVNU
FTOH vs. RVNU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ohio Municipal Income ETF (FTOH) and Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU). 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.
| FTOH | RVNU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.39 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.04 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 14.37 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FTOH vs. RVNU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTOH drawdown since its inception was -2.59%, smaller than the maximum RVNU drawdown of -23.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTOH and RVNU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTOH | RVNU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.59% | -23.51% | +20.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -10.35% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.51% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -23.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.47% | -1.99% | +1.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.50% | -4.96% | +4.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.70% | — |
Volatility
FTOH vs. RVNU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTOH | RVNU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.25% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.51% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.49% | 4.90% | -1.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.49% | 7.20% | -3.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.49% | 7.24% | -3.75% |
FTOH vs. RVNU - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTOH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than RVNU's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTOH vs. RVNU - Dividend Comparison
FTOH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, less than RVNU's 3.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTOH Franklin Ohio Municipal Income ETF | 2.54% | 0.56% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 3.52% | 3.46% | 3.06% | 2.79% | 2.81% | 2.18% | 2.43% | 2.75% | 2.76% | 2.49% | 2.72% | 3.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTOH and RVNU have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RVNU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RVNU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FTOH.
RVNU has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 2.54% for FTOH.
FTOH tracks Actively Managed, while RVNU tracks Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTOH and 0.15% for RVNU.
Find the right allocation for FTOH and RVNU
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