GMUN vs. PUSH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GMUN (Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF) and PUSH (PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. GMUN is passively managed, while PUSH is actively managed. Over the past year, GMUN returned 4.92% vs 3.85% for PUSH. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

GMUN vs. PUSH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF (GMUN) and PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMUN achieves a -0.34% return, which is significantly lower than PUSH's 1.32% return.

GMUN

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.75%
• YTD: -0.34%
• 6M: 0.04%
• 1Y: 4.92%
• 3Y*: 3.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PUSH

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.32%
• 6M: 1.66%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMUN vs. PUSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GMUN Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF	-0.34%	5.92%	1.75%
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	1.32%	4.16%	1.74%

Correlation

The correlation between GMUN and PUSH is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024	0.40

The correlation between GMUN and PUSH shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (1 year) to 0.40 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GMUN vs. PUSH — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMUN

GMUN Risk / Return Rank: 55
GMUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
GMUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
GMUN Omega Ratio Rank: 81
GMUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
GMUN Martin Ratio Rank: 35

PUSH

PUSH Risk / Return Rank: 88
PUSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
PUSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
PUSH Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PUSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
PUSH Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

GMUN vs. PUSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF (GMUN) and PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). 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.

	GMUN	PUSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.54	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	3.84	-1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.71	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.75	7.72	-5.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.36	19.17	-13.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GMUN vs. PUSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMUN Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the PUSH Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMUN and PUSH, 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

	GMUN	PUSH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	2.54	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.99	2.91	-1.92

Drawdowns

GMUN vs. PUSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMUN drawdown since its inception was -4.35%, which is greater than PUSH's maximum drawdown of -0.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMUN and PUSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMUN	PUSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.35%	-0.85%	-3.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.83%	-0.50%	-2.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.29%	0.00%	-2.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.02%	-0.11%	-0.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	0.20%	+0.72%

Volatility

GMUN vs. PUSH - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF (GMUN) has a higher volatility of 1.09% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) at 0.30%. This indicates that GMUN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PUSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMUN	PUSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.09%	0.30%	+0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	0.98%	+1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.42%	1.52%	+0.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.96%	1.30%	+1.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.96%	1.30%	+1.66%

GMUN vs. PUSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GMUN and PUSH have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

GMUN vs. PUSH - Dividend Comparison

GMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.12%, less than PUSH's 3.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GMUN Goldman Sachs Community Municipal Bond ETF	3.12%	2.94%	3.22%	2.20%
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	3.23%	3.45%	1.86%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMUN and PUSH in my portfolio?

GMUN and PUSH have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMUN or PUSH?

GMUN has higher volatility (1.09%) compared to PUSH (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMUN dropped -4.35% vs PUSH's -0.85%.

Which ETF is better, GMUN or PUSH?

On 1-year performance, GMUN leads with 4.92% vs 3.85% for PUSH. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, PUSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMUN or PUSH?

Over the 1-year period, GMUN has performed better with a 4.92% return vs 3.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMUN or PUSH?

GMUN and PUSH have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMUN or PUSH?

PUSH has the higher dividend yield at 3.23%, compared with 3.12% for GMUN.

What is the main difference between GMUN and PUSH?

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and PGIM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PUSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.04), 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.