PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MUST vs. UTWO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MUST vs. UTWO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF (UTWO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUST achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly higher than UTWO's 0.33% return.


MUST

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

UTWO

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.07%
YTD
0.33%
6M
0.63%
1Y
3.13%
3Y*
3.78%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MUST vs. UTWO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
MUST
Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF
1.60%4.92%0.37%6.23%-2.08%
UTWO
US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF
0.33%4.79%3.71%3.45%-0.81%

Correlation

The correlation between MUST and UTWO is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 10, 2022

0.36

The correlation between MUST and UTWO shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.36 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

MUST vs. UTWO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUST
MUST Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
MUST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MUST Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
MUST Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
MUST Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
MUST Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

UTWO
UTWO Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
UTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
UTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
UTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
UTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
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. UTWO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF (UTWO). 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.


MUSTUTWODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.47

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.38

3.50

-1.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.52

12.89

-6.36

MUST vs. UTWO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUST Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the UTWO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUST and UTWO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MUSTUTWODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

2.33

-0.94

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

1.45

-0.91

Drawdowns

MUST vs. UTWO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUST drawdown since its inception was -13.83%, which is greater than UTWO's maximum drawdown of -2.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUST and UTWO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MUSTUTWODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.83%

-2.04%

-11.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.01%

-0.90%

-2.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.08%

-1.08%

-5.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.94%

-0.38%

-0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.41%

-0.49%

-2.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.10%

0.24%

+0.86%

Volatility

MUST vs. UTWO - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) has a higher volatility of 1.80% compared to US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF (UTWO) at 0.36%. This indicates that MUST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UTWO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MUSTUTWODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.80%

0.36%

+1.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.60%

0.92%

+2.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.17%

1.35%

+3.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.44%

2.07%

+3.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.59%

2.07%

+3.52%

MUST vs. UTWO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUST has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than UTWO's 0.15% 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. UTWO - Dividend Comparison

MUST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, less than UTWO's 3.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
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%
UTWO
US Treasury 2 Year Note ETF
3.50%3.63%4.22%4.39%1.22%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MUST and UTWO have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MUST has higher volatility (1.80%) compared to UTWO (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUST dropped -13.83% vs UTWO's -2.04%.

On 3-year performance, MUST leads with 3.82% vs 3.78% for UTWO. On fees, UTWO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, UTWO has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, MUST has performed better with a 3.82% return vs 3.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UTWO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for MUST.

UTWO has the higher dividend yield at 3.50%, compared with 3.32% for MUST.

MUST is categorized as Money Market, while UTWO is Government Bonds. MUST tracks Bloomberg Beta Advantage Multi-Sector Municipal Bond Index, while UTWO tracks ICE BofA Current 2 Year US Treasury Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and US Benchmark Series. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for MUST and 0.15% for UTWO.

UTWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MUST and UTWO

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