MUC vs. DFSMX
Compare and contrast key facts about BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) and DFA Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFSMX).
MUC is an actively managed fund by BlackRock. It was launched on Feb 27, 1998. DFSMX is managed by Dimensional. It was launched on Aug 19, 2002.
Performance
MUC vs. DFSMX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
MUC vs. DFSMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund | -0.42% | 5.96% | 0.76% | 7.86% | -26.81% | 7.38% | 11.85% | 18.12% | -9.00% | 6.07% |
DFSMX DFA Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio | 0.55% | 2.30% | 2.84% | 2.98% | -0.36% | -0.11% | 0.83% | 1.62% | 1.22% | 1.15% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUC achieves a -0.42% return, which is significantly lower than DFSMX's 0.55% return. Over the past 10 years, MUC has underperformed DFSMX with an annualized return of 0.58%, while DFSMX has yielded a comparatively higher 1.23% annualized return.
MUC
- 1D
- 1.56%
- 1M
- -4.11%
- YTD
- -0.42%
- 6M
- -1.25%
- 1Y
- 3.17%
- 3Y*
- 3.31%
- 5Y*
- -2.41%
- 10Y*
- 0.58%
DFSMX
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -0.05%
- YTD
- 0.55%
- 6M
- 1.10%
- 1Y
- 2.45%
- 3Y*
- 2.60%
- 5Y*
- 1.63%
- 10Y*
- 1.23%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
MUC vs. DFSMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUC has a 2.14% expense ratio, which is higher than DFSMX's 0.20% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
MUC vs. DFSMX — Risk / Return Rank
MUC
DFSMX
MUC vs. DFSMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) and DFA Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFSMX). 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 | DFSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.31 | 3.68 | -3.37 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.48 | 6.50 | -6.02 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 3.20 | -2.13 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.46 | 4.59 | -4.13 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.16 | 21.83 | -20.67 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MUC | DFSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 | 3.68 | -3.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.21 | 2.11 | -2.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.05 | 1.60 | -1.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.28 | 1.78 | -1.50 |
Correlation
The correlation between MUC and DFSMX is 0.14, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
MUC vs. DFSMX - Dividend Comparison
MUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.17%, more than DFSMX's 2.43% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUC BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund | 6.17% | 6.06% | 5.62% | 3.84% | 5.79% | 4.27% | 3.96% | 3.90% | 4.99% | 5.14% | 5.45% | 5.46% |
DFSMX DFA Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio | 2.43% | 2.08% | 2.80% | 1.94% | 0.63% | 0.19% | 0.83% | 1.22% | 1.11% | 0.95% | 0.94% | 0.95% |
Drawdowns
MUC vs. DFSMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUC drawdown since its inception was -48.97%, which is greater than DFSMX's maximum drawdown of -2.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUC and DFSMX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUC | DFSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.97% | -2.66% | -46.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.26% | -0.39% | -6.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.29% | -1.67% | -36.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.29% | -1.69% | -36.60% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.09% | -0.06% | -20.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.86% | -0.24% | -9.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.89% | 0.10% | +2.79% |
Volatility
MUC vs. DFSMX - Volatility Comparison
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund (MUC) has a higher volatility of 3.17% compared to DFA Short Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DFSMX) at 0.11%. This indicates that MUC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFSMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| MUC | DFSMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.17% | 0.11% | +3.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.80% | 0.37% | +5.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.35% | 0.68% | +9.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.46% | 0.78% | +10.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.89% | 0.77% | +11.12% |