GUMI vs. AMUN
GUMI (Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF) and AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GUMI charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AMUN.
Performance
GUMI vs. AMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GUMI having a 1.06% return and AMUN slightly higher at 1.11%.
GUMI
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 1.20%
- 1Y
- 3.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 1.11%
- 6M
- 1.36%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GUMI vs. AMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF | 1.06% | 0.73% |
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.11% | 0.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between GUMI and AMUN is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2025 | 0.16 |
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
GUMI vs. AMUN — Risk / Return Rank
GUMI
AMUN
GUMI vs. AMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI) and abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN). 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.
| GUMI | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.64 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 8.93 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 37.83 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GUMI | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 3.29 | 2.05 | +1.24 |
Drawdowns
GUMI vs. AMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GUMI drawdown since its inception was -0.48%, smaller than the maximum AMUN drawdown of -0.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GUMI and AMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GUMI | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.48% | -0.61% | +0.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.36% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | -0.02% | -0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.05% | -0.09% | +0.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.08% | — | — |
Volatility
GUMI vs. AMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GUMI | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.25% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.55% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.09% | 1.01% | +0.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.99% | 1.01% | -0.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.99% | 1.01% | -0.02% |
GUMI vs. AMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
GUMI has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than AMUN's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GUMI vs. AMUN - Dividend Comparison
GUMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.77%, more than AMUN's 1.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.89% | 0.66% | 0.00% |
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF | 2.77% | 2.95% | 1.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GUMI and AMUN have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GUMI is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GUMI is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMUN.
GUMI has the higher dividend yield at 2.77%, compared with 1.89% for AMUN.
They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for GUMI and 0.25% for AMUN.
Find the right allocation for GUMI and AMUN
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