MUB vs. CMF
MUB (iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF) and CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds from iShares - MUB tracks the S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index while CMF tracks the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MUB returned 1.90%/yr vs 1.65%/yr for CMF. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MUB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for CMF.
Performance
MUB vs. CMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUB achieves a 1.48% return, which is significantly higher than CMF's 1.21% return. Over the past 10 years, MUB has outperformed CMF with an annualized return of 1.90%, while CMF has yielded a comparatively lower 1.65% annualized return.
MUB
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- 1.48%
- 6M
- 1.78%
- 1Y
- 6.40%
- 3Y*
- 3.19%
- 5Y*
- 0.93%
- 10Y*
- 1.90%
CMF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 1.32%
- YTD
- 1.21%
- 6M
- 1.33%
- 1Y
- 6.50%
- 3Y*
- 3.12%
- 5Y*
- 0.72%
- 10Y*
- 1.65%
MUB vs. CMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 1.48% | 3.78% | 1.26% | 5.56% | -7.34% | 1.02% | 5.12% | 7.06% | 0.93% | 4.72% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 1.21% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUB and CMF is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2007 | 0.57 |
Over the past year, MUB and CMF have become more correlated (0.89) than their long-term average of 0.57, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
MUB vs. CMF — Risk / Return Rank
MUB
CMF
MUB vs. CMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF). 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.
| MUB | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.53 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 2.24 | +0.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.02 | 7.36 | +0.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUB vs. CMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, smaller than the maximum CMF drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUB and CMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUB | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.68% | -16.45% | +2.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.79% | -2.91% | +0.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.34% | -5.22% | -0.12% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.88% | -12.45% | +0.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.68% | -14.57% | +0.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.47% | -0.68% | +0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -4.76% | +2.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.80% | 0.88% | -0.08% |
Volatility
MUB vs. CMF - Volatility Comparison
iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) has a higher volatility of 0.77% compared to iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) at 0.72%. This indicates that MUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUB | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.77% | 0.72% | +0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.27% | 2.17% | +0.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.88% | 2.77% | +0.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.07% | 4.19% | -0.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.92% | 5.08% | -0.16% |
MUB vs. CMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than CMF's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
MUB vs. CMF - Dividend Comparison
MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than CMF's 2.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.95% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 3.17% | 3.14% | 3.01% | 2.65% | 2.11% | 1.81% | 2.11% | 2.42% | 2.46% | 2.26% | 2.21% | 2.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUB and CMF have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MUB has higher volatility (0.77%) compared to CMF (0.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUB dropped -13.68% vs CMF's -16.45%.
On 10-year performance, MUB leads with 1.90% vs 1.65% for CMF. On fees, MUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MUB has performed better with a 1.90% return vs 1.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CMF.
MUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 2.95% for CMF.
MUB tracks S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for MUB and 0.25% for CMF.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for MUB and CMF
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