MUB vs. GUMI
MUB (iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF) and GUMI (Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MUB is passively managed, while GUMI is actively managed. Over the past year, MUB returned 6.87% vs 3.17% for GUMI. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for GUMI.
Performance
MUB vs. GUMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUB achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly higher than GUMI's 1.12% return.
MUB
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 0.66%
- YTD
- 1.41%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 6.87%
- 3Y*
- 3.41%
- 5Y*
- 0.89%
- 10Y*
- 2.01%
GUMI
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 1.12%
- 6M
- 1.35%
- 1Y
- 3.17%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MUB vs. GUMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 1.41% | 3.78% | 1.03% |
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF | 1.12% | 3.39% | 1.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUB and GUMI is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2024 | 0.36 |
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. GUMI — Risk / Return Rank
MUB
GUMI
MUB vs. GUMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) and Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI). 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.
| MUB | GUMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.64 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 8.90 | -6.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.74 | 37.70 | -28.96 |
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
| MUB | GUMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.37 | 2.91 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.41 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 3.32 | -2.73 |
Drawdowns
MUB vs. GUMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, which is greater than GUMI's maximum drawdown of -0.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUB and GUMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUB | GUMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.68% | -0.48% | -13.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.79% | -0.36% | -2.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.34% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.88% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.53% | 0.00% | -0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -0.05% | -2.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.79% | 0.08% | +0.71% |
Volatility
MUB vs. GUMI - Volatility Comparison
iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) has a higher volatility of 0.98% compared to Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF (GUMI) at 0.25%. This indicates that MUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GUMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUB | GUMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.98% | 0.25% | +0.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.22% | 0.55% | +1.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92% | 1.10% | +1.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.06% | 0.99% | +3.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.92% | 0.99% | +3.93% |
MUB vs. GUMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than GUMI's 0.16% 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. GUMI - Dividend Comparison
MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than GUMI's 2.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GUMI Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Municipal Income ETF | 2.77% | 2.95% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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 GUMI have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MUB has higher volatility (0.98%) compared to GUMI (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUB dropped -13.68% vs GUMI's -0.48%.
On 1-year performance, MUB leads with 6.87% vs 3.17% for GUMI. On fees, MUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, GUMI has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MUB has performed better with a 6.87% return vs 3.17%. 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 0.16% for GUMI.
MUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 2.77% for GUMI.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for MUB and 0.16% for GUMI.
GUMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.37), 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 GUMI
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