MUND vs. TDTF
MUND (Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF) and TDTF (FlexShares iBoxx 5-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - MUND is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Northern Trust, while TDTF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx 5-Year Target Duration TIPS. MUND is actively managed, while TDTF is passively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.18% expense ratio.
Performance
MUND vs. TDTF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUND achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than TDTF's 1.31% return.
MUND
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 2.16%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TDTF
- 1D
- 0.21%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- YTD
- 1.31%
- 6M
- 1.33%
- 1Y
- 3.63%
- 3Y*
- 4.57%
- 5Y*
- 1.75%
- 10Y*
- 2.83%
MUND vs. TDTF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MUND Northern Trust 2055 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.81% | 4.41% |
TDTF FlexShares iBoxx 5-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund | 1.31% | 1.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUND and TDTF is 0.31, 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 | 0.31 |
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. TDTF — Risk / Return Rank
MUND
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
TDTF
MUND vs. TDTF - 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 iBoxx 5-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund (TDTF). 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 | TDTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.21 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.30 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.81 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUND vs. TDTF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUND drawdown since its inception was -4.19%, smaller than the maximum TDTF drawdown of -12.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUND and TDTF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUND | TDTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.19% | -12.02% | +7.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -3.79% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -12.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.45% | -0.78% | -0.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.87% | -2.90% | +1.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.53% | — |
Volatility
MUND vs. TDTF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUND | TDTF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.26% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.24% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.08% | 3.15% | +3.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.08% | 5.68% | +1.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.08% | 5.08% | +2.00% |
MUND vs. TDTF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both MUND and TDTF have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
MUND vs. TDTF - Dividend Comparison
MUND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than TDTF's 4.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TDTF FlexShares iBoxx 5-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund | 4.72% | 4.58% | 3.98% | 3.97% | 7.60% | 4.55% | 1.13% | 1.80% | 2.60% | 2.20% | 1.51% | 0.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUND and TDTF have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUND and TDTF have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.
TDTF has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 2.79% for MUND.
MUND is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while TDTF is Inflation-Protected Bonds.
Find the right allocation for MUND and TDTF
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