PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MLN vs. FLTR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MLN vs. FLTR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLN (VanEck Long Muni ETF) and FLTR (VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg AMT-Free Long Continuous, while FLTR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLN returned 1.49%/yr vs 3.51%/yr for FLTR. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLN charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLTR.

Performance

MLN vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MLN having a 1.92% return and FLTR slightly lower at 1.91%. Over the past 10 years, MLN has underperformed FLTR with an annualized return of 1.49%, while FLTR has yielded a comparatively higher 3.51% annualized return.

MLN

1D
-0.26%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.92%
6M
2.58%
1Y
9.33%
3Y*
3.46%
5Y*
-1.05%
10Y*
1.49%

FLTR

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.91%
6M
2.40%
1Y
5.30%
3Y*
6.10%
5Y*
4.49%
10Y*
3.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MLN vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MLN
VanEck Long Muni ETF		1.92%1.82%1.54%8.05%-17.20%2.20%6.22%10.72%-0.77%8.19%
FLTR
VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF		1.91%5.22%7.38%7.41%0.74%0.55%1.44%5.70%0.30%2.80%

Correlation

The correlation between MLN and FLTR is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.03

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.03

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2011

0.00

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VanEck Long Muni ETF

VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF

Often compared with MLN:
MLN vs. SGOVMLN vs. HYMUMLN vs. LKORMLN vs. VCLTMLN vs. TLTMLN vs. EMNTMLN vs. BLV
Often compared with FLTR:
FLTR vs. FLOTFLTR vs. SGOVFLTR vs. VRIGFLTR vs. ICSHFLTR vs. JBBBFLTR vs. USFRFLTR vs. TDTT

Return for Risk

MLN vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MLN
MLN Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLN Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
MLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLN Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
FLTR
FLTR Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
FLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
FLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MLN vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.

MLNFLTRDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.11

6.77

-4.66

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.15

12.78

-9.62

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

3.15

-1.70

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.66

16.96

-13.30

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.02

101.23

-89.21

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLN vs. FLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the FLTR Sharpe Ratio of 6.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLN and FLTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

MLNFLTRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.11

6.77

-4.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.14

2.11

-2.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.17

0.70

-0.54

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

0.53

-0.21

Drawdowns

MLN vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLN drawdown since its inception was -28.36%, which is greater than FLTR's maximum drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLN and FLTR.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MLNFLTRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.36%

-17.84%

-10.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.56%

-0.31%

-2.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.84%

-1.93%

-7.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.46%

-3.06%

-21.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.46%

-17.84%

-6.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.58%

-0.04%

-6.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.73%

-0.67%

-5.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.78%

0.05%

+0.73%

Volatility

MLN vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) has a higher volatility of 1.56% compared to VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.25%. This indicates that MLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MLNFLTRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.56%

0.25%

+1.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.19%

0.62%

+2.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

0.79%

+3.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.31%

2.13%

+5.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.88%

5.00%

+3.88%

MLN vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLN has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

MLN vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison

MLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, less than FLTR's 4.73% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLTR
VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF		4.73%4.97%5.93%6.07%2.29%0.63%1.49%3.05%2.67%1.69%1.16%0.71%
MLN
VanEck Long Muni ETF		3.71%3.73%3.59%3.19%2.67%2.52%2.69%2.98%3.09%2.91%3.16%3.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

MLN and FLTR have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MLN has higher volatility (1.56%) compared to FLTR (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLN dropped -28.36% vs FLTR's -17.84%.

On 10-year performance, FLTR leads with 3.51% vs 1.49% for MLN. On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FLTR has performed better with a 3.51% return vs 1.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for MLN.

FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.73%, compared with 3.71% for MLN.

MLN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FLTR is Corporate Bonds. MLN tracks Bloomberg AMT-Free Long Continuous, while FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for MLN and 0.14% for FLTR.

FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.77 vs 2.11), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MLN and FLTR

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