MMCA vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MMCA is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by IndexIQ, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MMCA returned 6.36% vs 3.96% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

MMCA vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMCA achieves a 1.22% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.86% return.

MMCA

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 1.31%
• YTD: 1.22%
• 6M: 1.38%
• 1Y: 6.36%
• 3Y*: 4.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 1.86%
• 6M: 1.93%
• 1Y: 3.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MMCA vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF	1.22%	5.74%	0.78%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.86%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between MMCA and CSHP is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	-0.19

Return for Risk

MMCA vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMCA

MMCA Risk / Return Rank: 68
MMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
MMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 89
MMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
MMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 42

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

MMCA vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.50	11.22	-8.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	28.31	-24.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	6.67	-5.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	65.84	-63.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.48	395.75	-389.27

MMCA vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMCA Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMCA and CSHP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MMCA vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -16.04%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMCA	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.04%	-0.08%	-15.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.01%	-0.06%	-2.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.98%	-0.01%	-0.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.05%	-0.00%	-7.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.98%	0.01%	+0.97%

Volatility

MMCA vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) has a higher volatility of 0.70% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that MMCA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MMCA	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.70%	0.15%	+0.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.92%	0.27%	+1.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56%	0.36%	+2.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.59%	0.41%	+3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.59%	0.41%	+3.18%

MMCA vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMCA vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.27%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.91%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF	3.27%	3.39%	3.66%	3.57%	2.90%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMCA and CSHP in my portfolio?

MMCA and CSHP have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MMCA or CSHP?

MMCA has higher volatility (0.70%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMCA dropped -16.04% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, MMCA or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, MMCA leads with 6.36% vs 3.96% for CSHP. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MMCA or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, MMCA has performed better with a 6.36% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MMCA or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MMCA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MMCA or CSHP?

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 3.27% for MMCA.

What is the main difference between MMCA and CSHP?

MMCA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs 2.50), 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.