MUND vs. HYGV
MUND (Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF) and HYGV (FlexShares High Yield Value-Scored US Bond Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - MUND is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Northern Trust, while HYGV is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the Northern Trust High Yield Value-Scored US Corporate Bond Index. MUND is actively managed, while HYGV is passively managed. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUND charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.37%/yr for HYGV.
Performance
MUND vs. HYGV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MUND having a 1.81% return and HYGV slightly lower at 1.76%.
MUND
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 2.16%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HYGV
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.39%
- YTD
- 1.76%
- 6M
- 1.75%
- 1Y
- 5.73%
- 3Y*
- 8.48%
- 5Y*
- 3.37%
- 10Y*
- —
MUND vs. HYGV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MUND Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.81% | 4.41% |
HYGV FlexShares High Yield Value-Scored US Bond Index Fund | 1.76% | 2.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUND and HYGV is 0.33, 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 | 0.33 |
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
MUND vs. HYGV — Risk / Return Rank
MUND
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
HYGV
MUND vs. HYGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF (MUND) and FlexShares High Yield Value-Scored US Bond Index Fund (HYGV). 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.
| MUND | HYGV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.28 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.14 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.21 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUND vs. HYGV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUND drawdown since its inception was -4.19%, smaller than the maximum HYGV drawdown of -23.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUND and HYGV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUND | HYGV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.19% | -23.47% | +19.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.56% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.45% | -0.20% | -1.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.87% | -3.30% | +1.43% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.62% | — |
Volatility
MUND vs. HYGV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUND | HYGV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.98% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.08% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.08% | 3.87% | +3.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.08% | 7.60% | -0.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.08% | 9.17% | -2.09% |
MUND vs. HYGV - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUND has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than HYGV's 0.37% expense ratio.
Dividends
MUND vs. HYGV - Dividend Comparison
MUND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than HYGV's 7.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HYGV FlexShares High Yield Value-Scored US Bond Index Fund | 7.38% | 7.48% | 8.20% | 8.77% | 7.64% | 6.07% | 6.18% | 7.95% | 5.63% |
MUND Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 2.79% | 1.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUND and HYGV have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MUND is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUND is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for HYGV.
HYGV has the higher dividend yield at 7.38%, compared with 2.79% for MUND.
MUND is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while HYGV is High Yield Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for MUND and 0.37% for HYGV.
Find the right allocation for MUND and HYGV
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