FUMB vs. RMCA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FUMB (First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF) and RMCA (Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FUMB returned 2.55% vs 7.50% for RMCA. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FUMB charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for RMCA.

Performance

FUMB vs. RMCA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF (FUMB) and Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FUMB achieves a 1.07% return, which is significantly lower than RMCA's 2.37% return.

FUMB

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.15%
• YTD: 1.07%
• 6M: 1.30%
• 1Y: 2.55%
• 3Y*: 2.98%
• 5Y*: 1.96%
• 10Y*: —

RMCA

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 2.37%
• 6M: 2.78%
• 1Y: 7.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FUMB vs. RMCA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FUMB First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF	1.07%	2.78%	0.96%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	2.37%	2.35%	-0.14%

Correlation

The correlation between FUMB and RMCA is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2024	0.26

Return for Risk

FUMB vs. RMCA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FUMB

FUMB Risk / Return Rank: 95
FUMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FUMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
FUMB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FUMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FUMB Martin Ratio Rank: 97

RMCA

RMCA Risk / Return Rank: 65
RMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
RMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 71
RMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
RMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

FUMB vs. RMCA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF (FUMB) and Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA). 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.

	FUMB	RMCA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.38	2.00	+1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.34	3.01	+2.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.76	1.42	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.70	3.21	+8.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	44.37	10.63	+33.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FUMB vs. RMCA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FUMB Sharpe Ratio is 3.38, which is higher than the RMCA Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FUMB and RMCA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FUMB	RMCA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.38	2.00	+1.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.70	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	0.48	+0.53

Drawdowns

FUMB vs. RMCA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FUMB drawdown since its inception was -2.68%, smaller than the maximum RMCA drawdown of -5.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FUMB and RMCA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FUMB	RMCA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.68%	-5.95%	+3.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.22%	-2.35%	+2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.60%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-1.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	-0.16%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.19%	-1.63%	+1.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.06%	0.71%	-0.65%

Volatility

FUMB vs. RMCA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF (FUMB) is 0.20%, while Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) has a volatility of 1.15%. This indicates that FUMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RMCA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FUMB	RMCA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.20%	1.15%	-0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.53%	2.49%	-1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76%	3.76%	-3.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.16%	5.38%	-4.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.77%	5.38%	-3.61%

FUMB vs. RMCA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FUMB has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than RMCA's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

FUMB vs. RMCA - Dividend Comparison

FUMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.80%, less than RMCA's 4.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FUMB First Trust Ultra Short Duration Municipal ETF	2.80%	2.90%	2.86%	2.24%	1.02%	0.43%	0.94%	1.74%	0.15%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	4.36%	4.51%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FUMB and RMCA in my portfolio?

FUMB and RMCA have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FUMB or RMCA?

RMCA has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to FUMB (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FUMB dropped -2.68% vs RMCA's -5.95%.

Which ETF is better, FUMB or RMCA?

On 1-year performance, RMCA leads with 7.50% vs 2.55% for FUMB. On fees, FUMB is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FUMB has been the lower-risk option at 0.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FUMB or RMCA?

Over the 1-year period, RMCA has performed better with a 7.50% return vs 2.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FUMB or RMCA?

FUMB is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMCA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FUMB or RMCA?

RMCA has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 2.80% for FUMB.

What is the main difference between FUMB and RMCA?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Rockefeller. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FUMB and 0.55% for RMCA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FUMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.38 vs 2.00), 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.