MUNA vs. ESG
MUNA (Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF) and ESG (FlexShares STOXX US ESG Select Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - MUNA is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Northern Trust, while ESG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the STOXX USA ESG Select KPIs Index. MUNA is actively managed, while ESG is passively managed. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUNA charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ESG.
Performance
MUNA vs. ESG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUNA achieves a 1.42% return, which is significantly lower than ESG's 10.65% return.
MUNA
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 1.42%
- 6M
- 1.45%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ESG
- 1D
- 0.29%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 10.65%
- 6M
- 9.41%
- 1Y
- 20.98%
- 3Y*
- 19.24%
- 5Y*
- 12.07%
- 10Y*
- —
MUNA vs. ESG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MUNA Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.42% | 0.68% |
ESG FlexShares STOXX US ESG Select Index Fund | 10.65% | 5.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUNA and ESG is 0.27, 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 Aug 19, 2025 | 0.27 |
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
MUNA vs. ESG — Risk / Return Rank
MUNA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ESG
MUNA vs. ESG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF (MUNA) and FlexShares STOXX US ESG Select Index Fund (ESG). 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.
| MUNA | ESG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.33 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.43 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.15 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUNA vs. ESG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUNA drawdown since its inception was -0.91%, smaller than the maximum ESG drawdown of -32.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUNA and ESG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUNA | ESG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.91% | -32.53% | +31.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.32% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.04% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.56% | -1.83% | +1.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.27% | -5.05% | +4.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.07% | — |
Volatility
MUNA vs. ESG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUNA | ESG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.31% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 9.22% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.83% | 11.52% | -9.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.83% | 16.80% | -14.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.83% | 18.34% | -16.51% |
MUNA vs. ESG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUNA has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ESG's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
MUNA vs. ESG - Dividend Comparison
MUNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, more than ESG's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESG FlexShares STOXX US ESG Select Index Fund | 0.88% | 0.96% | 1.18% | 1.10% | 1.38% | 1.03% | 1.33% | 1.51% | 1.72% | 1.52% | 0.92% |
MUNA Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.66% | 0.76% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUNA and ESG have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MUNA is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUNA is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ESG.
MUNA has the higher dividend yield at 1.66%, compared with 0.88% for ESG.
MUNA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while ESG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for MUNA and 0.32% for ESG.
Find the right allocation for MUNA and ESG
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