MUST vs. GMMF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MUST (Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF) and GMMF (iShares Government Money Market ETF) are both Money Market funds. MUST is passively managed, while GMMF is actively managed. Over the past year, MUST returned 7.14% vs 3.87% for GMMF. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MUST charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for GMMF.

Performance

MUST vs. GMMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUST achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly higher than GMMF's 1.47% return.

MUST

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.08%
• YTD: 1.60%
• 6M: 1.55%
• 1Y: 7.14%
• 3Y*: 3.82%
• 5Y*: 0.87%
• 10Y*: —

GMMF

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 1.47%
• 6M: 1.75%
• 1Y: 3.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MUST vs. GMMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF	1.60%	3.81%
GMMF iShares Government Money Market ETF	1.47%	3.70%

Correlation

The correlation between MUST and GMMF is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	0.04

Return for Risk

MUST vs. GMMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUST

MUST Risk / Return Rank: 41
MUST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
MUST Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
MUST Omega Ratio Rank: 40
MUST Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
MUST Martin Ratio Rank: 41

GMMF

GMMF Risk / Return Rank: 100
GMMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
GMMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
GMMF Omega Ratio Rank: 100
GMMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
GMMF Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

MUST vs. GMMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF). 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.

	MUST	GMMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	17.52	-16.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	86.57	-84.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	24.81	-23.55
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	129.87	-127.49
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.52	1,318.32	-1,311.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MUST vs. GMMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUST Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the GMMF Sharpe Ratio of 17.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUST and GMMF, 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

	MUST	GMMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.39	17.52	-16.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	16.34	-15.80

Drawdowns

MUST vs. GMMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUST drawdown since its inception was -13.83%, which is greater than GMMF's maximum drawdown of -0.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUST and GMMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUST	GMMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.83%	-0.03%	-13.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.01%	-0.03%	-2.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.94%	0.00%	-0.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.41%	-0.00%	-3.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.10%	0.00%	+1.10%

Volatility

MUST vs. GMMF - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) has a higher volatility of 1.80% compared to iShares Government Money Market ETF (GMMF) at 0.06%. This indicates that MUST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MUST	GMMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.80%	0.06%	+1.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.60%	0.14%	+3.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.17%	0.22%	+4.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.44%	0.24%	+5.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.59%	0.24%	+5.35%

MUST vs. GMMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUST has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than GMMF's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

MUST vs. GMMF - Dividend Comparison

MUST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, less than GMMF's 3.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
GMMF iShares Government Money Market ETF	3.67%	3.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF	3.32%	3.28%	3.13%	2.51%	1.76%	1.62%	2.33%	2.70%	0.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MUST and GMMF in my portfolio?

MUST and GMMF have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MUST or GMMF?

MUST has higher volatility (1.80%) compared to GMMF (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUST dropped -13.83% vs GMMF's -0.03%.

Which ETF is better, MUST or GMMF?

On 1-year performance, MUST leads with 7.14% vs 3.87% for GMMF. On fees, GMMF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, GMMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MUST or GMMF?

Over the 1-year period, MUST has performed better with a 7.14% return vs 3.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MUST or GMMF?

GMMF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for MUST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MUST or GMMF?

GMMF has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 3.32% for MUST.

What is the main difference between MUST and GMMF?

They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for MUST and 0.20% for GMMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.52 vs 1.39), 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.