MMCA vs. CMF
MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MMCA is actively managed, while CMF is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MMCA returned 3.51%/yr vs 2.68%/yr for CMF. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for CMF.
Performance
MMCA vs. CMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MMCA achieves a -0.40% return, which is significantly lower than CMF's -0.17% return.
MMCA
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- -1.77%
- 6M
- -1.28%
- YTD
- -0.40%
- 1Y
- 3.45%
- 3Y*
- 3.51%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -0.13%
CMF
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -1.82%
- 6M
- -0.93%
- YTD
- -0.17%
- 1Y
- 4.37%
- 3Y*
- 2.68%
- 5Y*
- 0.31%
- 10Y*
- 1.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.21%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29.81M | $26.50M | $27.09M | |
| $492.44K | $438.66K | $542.17K |
MMCA vs. CMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | -0.40% | 5.74% | 1.70% | 5.77% | -12.15% | -0.13% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | -0.17% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between MMCA and CMF is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.74 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.75 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 21, 2021 | 0.75 |
The correlation between MMCA and CMF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.75 - 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
MMCA vs. CMF — Risk / Return Rank
MMCA
CMF
MMCA vs. CMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| MMCA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.38 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.31 | 1.73 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.51 | 5.29 | -1.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MMCA vs. CMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -16.04%, roughly equal to the maximum CMF drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and CMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MMCA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.04% | -16.45% | +0.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.01% | -2.91% | -0.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.44% | -5.22% | +1.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.40% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.57% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.57% | -2.03% | -0.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.91% | -4.74% | -2.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.12% | 0.95% | +0.17% |
Volatility
MMCA vs. CMF - Volatility Comparison
IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) have volatilities of 0.90% and 0.86%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MMCA | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.90% | 0.86% | +0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.10% | 2.28% | -0.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.65% | 2.86% | -0.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.58% | 4.21% | -0.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.58% | 5.08% | -1.50% |
MMCA vs. CMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than CMF's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
MMCA vs. CMF - Dividend Comparison
MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.59%, more than CMF's 2.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.74% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 3.29% | 3.39% | 3.66% | 3.57% | 2.90% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MMCA and CMF have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MMCA has higher volatility (0.90%) compared to CMF (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMCA dropped -16.04% vs CMF's -16.45%.
On 3-year performance, MMCA leads with 3.51% vs 2.68% for CMF. On fees, CMF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MMCA has performed better with a 3.51% return vs 2.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MMCA.
MMCA has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.74% for CMF.
They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.08% for CMF.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.49), 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 MMCA and CMF
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