MUB vs. ZMUN
MUB (iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF) and ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - MUB tracks the S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index while ZMUN tracks the Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZMUN.
Performance
MUB vs. ZMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUB achieves a 1.24% return, which is significantly lower than ZMUN's 1.57% return.
MUB
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 0.56%
- YTD
- 1.24%
- 6M
- 1.74%
- 1Y
- 6.95%
- 3Y*
- 3.43%
- 5Y*
- 0.86%
- 10Y*
- 2.00%
ZMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MUB vs. ZMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 1.24% | 1.66% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 1.57% | 0.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUB and ZMUN is 0.14, 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 | 0.14 |
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. ZMUN — Risk / Return Rank
MUB
ZMUN
MUB vs. ZMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) 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.
| MUB | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.50 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.85 | — | — |
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 | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.41 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 6.46 | -5.87 |
Drawdowns
MUB vs. ZMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, which is greater than ZMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUB and ZMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUB | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.68% | -0.09% | -13.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.79% | — | — |
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 | -0.70% | -0.02% | -0.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -0.01% | -2.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.79% | — | — |
Volatility
MUB vs. ZMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUB | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.97% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.22% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92% | 0.54% | +2.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.06% | 0.54% | +3.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.92% | 0.54% | +4.38% |
MUB vs. ZMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than ZMUN's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
MUB vs. ZMUN - Dividend Comparison
MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than ZMUN's 2.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 2.28% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUB and ZMUN have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ZMUN.
MUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 2.28% for ZMUN.
MUB tracks S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while ZMUN tracks Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for MUB and 0.30% for ZMUN.
Find the right allocation for MUB 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