MMCA vs. ESGB
MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and ESGB (IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MMCA is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by IndexIQ, while ESGB is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by IndexIQ. Both are actively managed. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ESGB.
Performance
MMCA vs. ESGB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MMCA
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 1.31%
- YTD
- 1.22%
- 6M
- 1.38%
- 1Y
- 6.36%
- 3Y*
- 4.11%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ESGB
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MMCA vs. ESGB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 0.55% |
ESGB IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF | -0.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between MMCA and ESGB is 0.02, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2026 | 0.02 |
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. ESGB — Risk / Return Rank
MMCA
ESGB
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
MMCA vs. ESGB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF (ESGB). 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 | ESGB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.12 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.48 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MMCA vs. ESGB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -16.04%, which is greater than ESGB's maximum drawdown of -0.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and ESGB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MMCA | ESGB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.04% | -0.64% | -15.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.01% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.98% | -0.39% | -0.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.05% | -0.38% | -6.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.98% | — | — |
Volatility
MMCA vs. ESGB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MMCA | ESGB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.70% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.92% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.56% | 4.10% | -1.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.59% | 4.10% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.59% | 4.10% | -0.51% |
MMCA vs. ESGB - Expense Ratio Comparison
MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than ESGB's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
MMCA vs. ESGB - Dividend Comparison
MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.27%, while ESGB has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESGB IQ MacKay ESG Core Plus Bond ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
MMCA and ESGB have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MMCA is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MMCA is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ESGB.
MMCA has the higher dividend yield at 3.27%, compared with 0.00% for ESGB.
MMCA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while ESGB is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.39% for ESGB.
Find the right allocation for MMCA and ESGB
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