MMCA vs. ZMUN
MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MMCA is actively managed, while ZMUN is passively managed. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZMUN.
Performance
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MMCA achieves a 0.66% return, which is significantly lower than ZMUN's 1.57% return.
MMCA
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- YTD
- 0.66%
- 6M
- 1.02%
- 1Y
- 6.39%
- 3Y*
- 4.06%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 0.66% | 1.45% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 1.57% | 0.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between MMCA and ZMUN is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.16 |
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. ZMUN — Risk / Return Rank
MMCA
ZMUN
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) and F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN). 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.
| MMCA | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.13 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.78 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MMCA | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.04 | 6.46 | -6.42 |
Drawdowns
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -15.97%, which is greater than ZMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and ZMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MMCA | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.97% | -0.09% | -15.88% |
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 | -1.53% | -0.02% | -1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.05% | -0.01% | -7.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.94% | — | — |
Volatility
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MMCA | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.90% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.89% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.60% | 0.54% | +2.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.61% | 0.54% | +3.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.61% | 0.54% | +3.07% |
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than ZMUN's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
MMCA vs. ZMUN - Dividend Comparison
MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, more than ZMUN's 2.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 3.29% | 3.39% | 3.66% | 3.57% | 2.90% | 0.05% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 2.28% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MMCA and ZMUN have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZMUN is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZMUN is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MMCA.
MMCA has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.28% for ZMUN.
They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.30% for ZMUN.
Find the right allocation for MMCA and ZMUN
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