PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MMIN vs. AUSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MMIN vs. AUSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMIN achieves a 2.23% return, which is significantly higher than AUSM's 1.46% return.


MMIN

1D
-0.17%
1M
-0.25%
6M
1.55%
YTD
2.23%
1Y
8.94%
3Y*
3.76%
5Y*
0.53%
10Y*

AUSM

1D
0.12%
1M
0.30%
6M
1.24%
YTD
1.46%
1Y
3.07%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MMIN vs. AUSM - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MMIN and AUSM is 0.09, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2025

0.08

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

MMIN vs. AUSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMIN
MMIN Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
MMIN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMIN Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMIN Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
MMIN Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMIN Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

AUSM
AUSM Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
AUSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUSM Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
AUSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUSM Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MMIN vs. AUSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). 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.


MMINAUSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

2.38

-0.86

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.12

7.38

-4.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.25

21.86

-9.61

MMIN vs. AUSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMIN Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is lower than the AUSM Sharpe Ratio of 4.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMIN and AUSM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MMIN vs. AUSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMIN drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, which is greater than AUSM's maximum drawdown of -0.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMIN and AUSM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MMINAUSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.87%

-0.42%

-16.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.87%

-0.42%

-2.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.91%

0.00%

-0.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.27%

-0.08%

-4.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.73%

0.14%

+0.59%

Volatility

MMIN vs. AUSM - Volatility Comparison

IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) has a higher volatility of 0.67% compared to Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM) at 0.16%. This indicates that MMIN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MMINAUSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.67%

0.16%

+0.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.50%

0.46%

+2.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.57%

0.74%

+2.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.03%

0.74%

+4.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.93%

0.74%

+6.19%

MMIN vs. AUSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMIN has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is higher than AUSM's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

MMIN vs. AUSM - Dividend Comparison

MMIN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%, more than AUSM's 2.61% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
AUSM
Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF
2.61%1.26%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MMIN
IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF
4.02%4.07%3.96%3.73%2.93%1.72%2.21%2.75%2.78%0.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


MMIN and AUSM have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MMIN has higher volatility (0.67%) compared to AUSM (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMIN dropped -16.87% vs AUSM's -0.42%.

On 1-year performance, MMIN leads with 8.94% vs 3.07% for AUSM. On fees, AUSM is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AUSM has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MMIN has performed better with a 8.94% return vs 3.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AUSM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.31% for MMIN.

MMIN has the higher dividend yield at 4.02%, compared with 2.61% for AUSM.

They also come from different issuers: New York Life and Allspring. Their fees differ too: 0.31% for MMIN and 0.18% for AUSM.

AUSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs 2.55), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MMIN and AUSM

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