MUC vs. BATVX
MUC (BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund) and BATVX (BlackRock Allocation Target Shares) are both Municipal Bonds funds from BlackRock. Over the past 5 years, MUC returned -2.59%/yr vs 1.51%/yr for BATVX. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUC charges 2.14%/yr vs 0.00%/yr for BATVX.
Performance
MUC vs. BATVX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUC achieves a 4.25% return, which is significantly higher than BATVX's 0.97% return.
MUC
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 0.40%
- YTD
- 4.25%
- 6M
- 4.67%
- 1Y
- 10.73%
- 3Y*
- 6.35%
- 5Y*
- -2.59%
- 10Y*
- 0.80%
BATVX
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 0.97%
- 6M
- 1.22%
- 1Y
- 2.58%
- 3Y*
- 2.47%
- 5Y*
- 1.51%
- 10Y*
- —
MUC vs. BATVX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund | 4.25% | 5.96% | 0.76% | 7.86% | -26.81% | 0.43% |
BATVX BlackRock Allocation Target Shares | 0.97% | 2.80% | 2.48% | 1.41% | -0.10% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUC and BATVX is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2021 | 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
MUC vs. BATVX — Risk / Return Rank
MUC
BATVX
MUC vs. BATVX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) and BlackRock Allocation Target Shares (BATVX). 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.
| MUC | BATVX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.34 | 3.57 | -2.23 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.12 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.64 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.69 | — | — |
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
| MUC | BATVX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 3.57 | -2.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.23 | 2.39 | -2.61 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.07 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 2.38 | -2.09 |
Drawdowns
MUC vs. BATVX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUC drawdown since its inception was -48.97%, which is greater than BATVX's maximum drawdown of -0.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUC and BATVX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUC | BATVX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.97% | -0.20% | -48.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.53% | 0.00% | -6.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.51% | -0.10% | -14.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.29% | -0.20% | -38.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.35% | 0.00% | -16.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.90% | -0.03% | -9.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.60% | 0.00% | +1.60% |
Volatility
MUC vs. BATVX - Volatility Comparison
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) has a higher volatility of 2.41% compared to BlackRock Allocation Target Shares (BATVX) at 0.20%. This indicates that MUC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BATVX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUC | BATVX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.41% | 0.20% | +2.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.28% | 0.54% | +5.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.05% | 0.73% | +7.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.50% | 0.64% | +10.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.89% | 0.63% | +11.26% |
MUC vs. BATVX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUC has a 2.14% expense ratio, which is higher than BATVX's 0.00% expense ratio.
Dividends
MUC vs. BATVX - Dividend Comparison
MUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.96%, more than BATVX's 2.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BATVX BlackRock Allocation Target Shares | 2.55% | 2.76% | 2.44% | 1.40% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund | 5.96% | 6.06% | 5.62% | 3.84% | 5.79% | 4.27% | 3.96% | 3.90% | 4.99% | 5.14% | 5.45% | 5.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUC and BATVX 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.
MUC has higher volatility (2.41%) compared to BATVX (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUC dropped -48.97% vs BATVX's -0.20%.
BATVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs 1.34), 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 MUC and BATVX
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