MMCA vs. SCMB

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and SCMB (Schwab Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MMCA is actively managed, while SCMB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MMCA returned 4.13%/yr vs 3.20%/yr for SCMB. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCMB.

Performance

MMCA vs. SCMB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMCA achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly lower than SCMB's 1.58% return.

MMCA

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 1.36%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 1.42%
• 1Y: 6.17%
• 3Y*: 4.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SCMB

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 1.67%
• YTD: 1.58%
• 6M: 1.70%
• 1Y: 6.50%
• 3Y*: 3.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MMCA vs. SCMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF	1.27%	5.74%	1.70%	5.77%	2.82%
SCMB Schwab Municipal Bond ETF	1.58%	3.78%	0.91%	5.86%	2.88%

Correlation

The correlation between MMCA and SCMB is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2022	0.74

The correlation between MMCA and SCMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MMCA vs. SCMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMCA

MMCA Risk / Return Rank: 71
MMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
MMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
MMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 91
MMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
MMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 43

SCMB

SCMB Risk / Return Rank: 69
SCMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
SCMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
SCMB Omega Ratio Rank: 87
SCMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
SCMB Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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. SCMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and Schwab Municipal Bond ETF (SCMB). 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	SCMB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	2.26	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.59	3.30	+0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.47	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	2.24	-0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.26	7.34	-1.08

MMCA vs. SCMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMCA Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the SCMB Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMCA and SCMB, 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. SCMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -16.04%, which is greater than SCMB's maximum drawdown of -6.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and SCMB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMCA	SCMB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.04%	-6.13%	-9.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.01%	-2.92%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.68%	-5.57%	+1.89%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.94%	-0.36%	-0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.03%	-1.31%	-5.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	0.89%	+0.10%

Volatility

MMCA vs. SCMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) is 0.71%, while Schwab Municipal Bond ETF (SCMB) has a volatility of 0.76%. This indicates that MMCA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MMCA	SCMB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.71%	0.76%	-0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.92%	2.17%	-0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.55%	2.89%	-0.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.59%	4.14%	-0.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.59%	4.14%	-0.55%

MMCA vs. SCMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than SCMB's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMCA vs. SCMB - Dividend Comparison

MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.27%, less than SCMB's 3.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF	3.27%	3.39%	3.66%	3.57%	2.90%	0.05%
SCMB Schwab Municipal Bond ETF	3.52%	3.36%	3.34%	3.10%	0.59%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMCA and SCMB in my portfolio?

MMCA and SCMB have a correlation of 0.67, 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 SCMB?

SCMB has higher volatility (0.76%) compared to MMCA (0.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMCA dropped -16.04% vs SCMB's -6.13%.

Which ETF is better, MMCA or SCMB?

On 3-year performance, MMCA leads with 4.13% vs 3.20% for SCMB. On fees, SCMB is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MMCA or SCMB?

Over the 3-year period, MMCA has performed better with a 4.13% return vs 3.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MMCA or SCMB?

SCMB is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MMCA.

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

SCMB has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 3.27% for MMCA.

What is the main difference between MMCA and SCMB?

They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.03% for SCMB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MMCA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 2.26), 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.