MINO vs. MUST
MINO (PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund) and MUST (Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MINO is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by PIMCO, while MUST is a Money Market fund tracking the Bloomberg Beta Advantage Multi-Sector Municipal Bond Index. MINO is actively managed, while MUST is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MINO returned 5.01%/yr vs 3.77%/yr for MUST. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MINO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for MUST.
Performance
MINO vs. MUST - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MINO achieves a 2.04% return, which is significantly higher than MUST's 1.45% return.
MINO
- 1D
- 0.24%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 2.04%
- 6M
- 2.15%
- 1Y
- 8.06%
- 3Y*
- 5.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MUST
- 1D
- 0.49%
- 1M
- 1.18%
- YTD
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 1.84%
- 1Y
- 6.55%
- 3Y*
- 3.77%
- 5Y*
- 0.80%
- 10Y*
- —
MINO vs. MUST - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MINO PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.04% | 4.42% | 3.13% | 8.46% | -10.43% | 0.28% |
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF | 1.45% | 4.92% | 0.37% | 6.23% | -8.82% | -0.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between MINO and MUST is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2021 | 0.51 |
The correlation between MINO and MUST has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.41 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
MINO vs. MUST — Risk / Return Rank
MINO
MUST
MINO vs. MUST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund (MINO) and Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST). 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.
| MINO | MUST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.97 | 1.27 | +1.70 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.56 | 1.85 | +2.71 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.65 | 1.24 | +0.41 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.30 | 2.29 | +1.01 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.87 | 6.31 | +5.56 |
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
| MINO | MUST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.97 | 1.27 | +1.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.15 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.32 | 0.54 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
MINO vs. MUST - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MINO drawdown since its inception was -15.24%, which is greater than MUST's maximum drawdown of -13.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINO and MUST.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MINO | MUST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.24% | -13.83% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.41% | -3.01% | +0.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.34% | -6.08% | +0.74% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.14% | -1.09% | +0.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.26% | -3.41% | -0.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.67% | 1.10% | -0.43% |
Volatility
MINO vs. MUST - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund (MINO) is 1.03%, while Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) has a volatility of 1.80%. This indicates that MINO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MINO | MUST | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.03% | 1.80% | -0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.92% | 3.62% | -1.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.73% | 5.18% | -2.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.55% | 5.44% | -0.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.55% | 5.60% | -1.05% |
MINO vs. MUST - Expense Ratio Comparison
MINO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than MUST's 0.23% expense ratio.
Dividends
MINO vs. MUST - Dividend Comparison
MINO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.89%, more than MUST's 3.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MINO PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 3.89% | 3.71% | 3.91% | 3.78% | 2.87% | 0.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF | 3.33% | 3.28% | 3.13% | 2.51% | 1.76% | 1.62% | 2.33% | 2.70% | 0.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MINO and MUST have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MUST has higher volatility (1.80%) compared to MINO (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINO dropped -15.24% vs MUST's -13.83%.
On 3-year performance, MINO leads with 5.01% vs 3.77% for MUST. On fees, MUST is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, MINO has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MINO has performed better with a 5.01% return vs 3.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MUST is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for MINO.
MINO has the higher dividend yield at 3.89%, compared with 3.33% for MUST.
MINO is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while MUST is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for MINO and 0.23% for MUST.
MINO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 1.27), 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.
Find the right allocation for MINO and MUST
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