GENM vs. SUB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GENM (Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF) and SUB (iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. GENM is actively managed, while SUB is passively managed. Over the past year, GENM returned 5.22% vs 3.18% for SUB. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GENM charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for SUB.

Performance

GENM vs. SUB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF (GENM) and iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GENM achieves a 1.68% return, which is significantly higher than SUB's 0.79% return.

GENM

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.64%
• YTD: 1.68%
• 6M: 1.86%
• 1Y: 5.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SUB

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.32%
• YTD: 0.79%
• 6M: 1.15%
• 1Y: 3.18%
• 3Y*: 3.19%
• 5Y*: 1.46%
• 10Y*: 1.49%

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

GENM vs. SUB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GENM Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF	1.68%	5.10%	2.29%
SUB iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF	0.79%	3.64%	2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between GENM and SUB is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2024	0.46

The correlation between GENM and SUB shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GENM vs. SUB — Risk / Return Rank

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

GENM

GENM Risk / Return Rank: 55
GENM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
GENM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
GENM Omega Ratio Rank: 62
GENM Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
GENM Martin Ratio Rank: 48

SUB

SUB Risk / Return Rank: 83
SUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
SUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
SUB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
SUB Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

GENM vs. SUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF (GENM) and iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB). 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.

	GENM	SUB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	3.20	-1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	4.64	-1.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.72	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.43	3.97	-1.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.90	11.24	-3.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GENM vs. SUB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GENM Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the SUB Sharpe Ratio of 3.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GENM and SUB, 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

	GENM	SUB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	3.20	-1.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.90	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.43	0.42	+1.01

Drawdowns

GENM vs. SUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GENM drawdown since its inception was -2.41%, smaller than the maximum SUB drawdown of -9.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GENM and SUB.

Drawdown Indicators

	GENM	SUB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.41%	-9.46%	+7.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.15%	-0.81%	-1.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.23%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-4.35%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-9.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.38%	-0.11%	-0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.49%	-0.92%	+0.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.66%	0.28%	+0.38%

Volatility

GENM vs. SUB - Volatility Comparison

Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF (GENM) has a higher volatility of 0.61% compared to iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB) at 0.28%. This indicates that GENM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GENM	SUB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.61%	0.28%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.86%	0.79%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.88%	1.00%	+1.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.16%	1.64%	+1.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.16%	2.60%	+0.56%

GENM vs. SUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

GENM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than SUB's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

GENM vs. SUB - Dividend Comparison

GENM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.92%, more than SUB's 2.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GENM Genter Capital Municipal Quality Intermediate ETF	2.92%	2.88%	2.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SUB iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF	2.53%	2.42%	2.10%	1.73%	0.86%	0.72%	1.23%	1.58%	1.32%	0.95%	0.75%	0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GENM and SUB in my portfolio?

GENM and SUB have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GENM or SUB?

GENM has higher volatility (0.61%) compared to SUB (0.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GENM dropped -2.41% vs SUB's -9.46%.

Which ETF is better, GENM or SUB?

On 1-year performance, GENM leads with 5.22% vs 3.18% for SUB. On fees, SUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, SUB has been the lower-risk option at 0.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GENM or SUB?

Over the 1-year period, GENM has performed better with a 5.22% return vs 3.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GENM or SUB?

SUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GENM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GENM or SUB?

GENM has the higher dividend yield at 2.92%, compared with 2.53% for SUB.

What is the main difference between GENM and SUB?

They also come from different issuers: Genter Capital and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GENM and 0.07% for SUB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 1.82), 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.