PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FTTMX vs. MUC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FTTMX vs. MUC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Michigan Tax-Free Income Fund (FTTMX) and BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTTMX achieves a 1.82% return, which is significantly lower than MUC's 4.06% return. Over the past 10 years, FTTMX has outperformed MUC with an annualized return of 1.93%, while MUC has yielded a comparatively lower 0.78% annualized return.


FTTMX

1D
0.19%
1M
0.86%
YTD
1.82%
6M
2.22%
1Y
7.45%
3Y*
4.16%
5Y*
0.67%
10Y*
1.93%

MUC

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.68%
YTD
4.06%
6M
3.70%
1Y
10.52%
3Y*
6.28%
5Y*
-2.69%
10Y*
0.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTTMX vs. MUC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FTTMX
Franklin Michigan Tax-Free Income Fund
1.82%4.37%2.68%5.59%-10.64%1.08%5.20%7.75%0.85%3.03%
MUC
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund
4.06%5.96%0.76%7.86%-26.81%7.38%11.85%18.12%-9.00%6.07%

Correlation

The correlation between FTTMX and MUC is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.44

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

0.48

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

0.47

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 1998

0.26

The correlation between FTTMX and MUC shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (all time) to 0.48 (3 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

FTTMX vs. MUC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTTMX
FTTMX Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
FTTMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTTMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTTMX Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
FTTMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTTMX Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

MUC
MUC Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
MUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
MUC Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
MUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
MUC Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

FTTMX vs. MUC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Michigan Tax-Free Income Fund (FTTMX) and BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC). 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.


FTTMXMUCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

1.25

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.93

1.62

+1.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.12

6.57

+3.55

FTTMX vs. MUC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTTMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the MUC Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTTMX and MUC, 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


FTTMXMUCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

1.31

+1.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

-0.24

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.07

+0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

0.29

+0.83

Drawdowns

FTTMX vs. MUC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTTMX drawdown since its inception was -18.79%, smaller than the maximum MUC drawdown of -48.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTTMX and MUC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTTMXMUCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.79%

-48.97%

+30.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.55%

-6.53%

+3.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.23%

-14.51%

+8.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.65%

-38.29%

+22.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-15.65%

-38.29%

+22.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-16.50%

+16.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.22%

-9.90%

+7.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.74%

1.60%

-0.86%

Volatility

FTTMX vs. MUC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Michigan Tax-Free Income Fund (FTTMX) is 1.24%, while BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) has a volatility of 2.37%. This indicates that FTTMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FTTMXMUCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.24%

2.37%

-1.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.21%

6.24%

-4.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.96%

8.05%

-5.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.11%

11.50%

-7.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.95%

11.89%

-7.94%

FTTMX vs. MUC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTTMX has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than MUC's 2.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

FTTMX vs. MUC - Dividend Comparison

FTTMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.35%, less than MUC's 5.97% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FTTMX
Franklin Michigan Tax-Free Income Fund
3.35%4.31%3.69%2.78%2.84%2.34%2.50%3.24%3.13%2.97%3.59%3.23%
MUC
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund
5.97%6.06%5.62%3.84%5.79%4.27%3.96%3.90%4.99%5.14%5.45%5.46%

Frequently Asked Questions


FTTMX and MUC have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MUC has higher volatility (2.37%) compared to FTTMX (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTTMX dropped -18.79% vs MUC's -48.97%.

FTTMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.31), 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 FTTMX and MUC

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