MUSE vs. BINC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MUSE (TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF) and BINC (iShares Flexible Income Active ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MUSE returned 8.14% vs 5.80% for BINC. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MUSE charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for BINC.

Performance

MUSE vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF (MUSE) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUSE achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 0.90% return.

MUSE

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.90%
• YTD: 2.30%
• 6M: 2.82%
• 1Y: 8.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BINC

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 0.90%
• 6M: 1.22%
• 1Y: 5.80%
• 3Y*: 7.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MUSE vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MUSE TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF	2.30%	8.25%	0.34%
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	0.90%	7.57%	0.46%

Correlation

The correlation between MUSE and BINC is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024	0.57

The correlation between MUSE and BINC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MUSE vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MUSE

MUSE Risk / Return Rank: 81
MUSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
MUSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
MUSE Omega Ratio Rank: 94
MUSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
MUSE Martin Ratio Rank: 66

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 67
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 50

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MUSE vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF (MUSE) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.

	MUSE	BINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.91	2.56	+0.36
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.62	3.71	+0.90
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.68	1.51	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	2.17	+1.05
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.96	8.53	+3.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MUSE vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUSE Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUSE and BINC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MUSE	BINC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.91	2.56	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.85	2.36	-0.51

Drawdowns

MUSE vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUSE drawdown since its inception was -3.63%, which is greater than BINC's maximum drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUSE and BINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUSE	BINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.63%	-2.69%	-0.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.54%	-2.69%	+0.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-2.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	-0.49%	+0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-0.36%	-0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.68%	0.68%	0.00%

Volatility

MUSE vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF (MUSE) has a higher volatility of 0.86% compared to iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) at 0.75%. This indicates that MUSE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MUSE	BINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.86%	0.75%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.40%	1.84%	+0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81%	2.28%	+0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.87%	3.00%	+0.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.87%	3.00%	+0.87%

MUSE vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUSE has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

MUSE vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

MUSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.70%, more than BINC's 5.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.86%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%
MUSE TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF	7.70%	7.35%	0.75%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MUSE and BINC in my portfolio?

MUSE and BINC have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MUSE or BINC?

MUSE has higher volatility (0.86%) compared to BINC (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUSE dropped -3.63% vs BINC's -2.69%.

Which ETF is better, MUSE or BINC?

On 1-year performance, MUSE leads with 8.14% vs 5.80% for BINC. On fees, BINC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, BINC has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MUSE or BINC?

Over the 1-year period, MUSE has performed better with a 8.14% return vs 5.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MUSE or BINC?

BINC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for MUSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MUSE or BINC?

MUSE has the higher dividend yield at 7.70%, compared with 5.86% for BINC.

What is the main difference between MUSE and BINC?

They also come from different issuers: TCW and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for MUSE and 0.40% for BINC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MUSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.56), 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.