MUST vs. XCEM

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM).

MUST and XCEM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. MUST is a passively managed fund by Ameriprise Financial that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Beta Advantage Multi-Sector Municipal Bond Index. It was launched on Oct 10, 2018. XCEM is a passively managed fund by Ameriprise Financial that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. It was launched on Sep 2, 2015. Both MUST and XCEM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

MUST vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

MUST vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF	0.02%	4.92%	0.37%	6.23%	-8.82%	1.93%	6.67%	8.35%	2.72%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	6.39%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-2.56%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUST achieves a 0.02% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 6.39% return.

MUST

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -2.40%
• YTD: 0.02%
• 6M: 1.52%
• 1Y: 5.29%
• 3Y*: 2.90%
• 5Y*: 0.78%
• 10Y*: —

XCEM

• 1D: 4.05%
• 1M: -10.45%
• YTD: 6.39%
• 6M: 16.19%
• 1Y: 42.93%
• 3Y*: 17.51%
• 5Y*: 7.34%
• 10Y*: 9.91%

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

MUST vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUST has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% 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%.

MUST

Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF

XCEM

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF

Return for Risk

MUST vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUST

MUST Risk / Return Rank: 44
MUST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
MUST Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
MUST Omega Ratio Rank: 42
MUST Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
MUST Martin Ratio Rank: 45

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 92
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 93
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.81	2.14	-1.33
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.10	2.82	-1.72
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.41	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.17	2.94	-1.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.26	12.34	-8.08
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. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUST Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUST and XCEM, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MUST	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81	2.14	-1.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	0.43	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.51	0.51	0.00

Correlation

The correlation between MUST and XCEM is 0.09, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

MUST vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

MUST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, more than XCEM's 3.06% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MUST Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF	3.29%	3.28%	3.13%	2.51%	1.76%	1.62%	2.33%	2.70%	0.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	3.06%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%

Drawdowns

MUST vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUST drawdown since its inception was -13.83%, smaller than the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUST and XCEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUST	XCEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.83%	-41.24%	+27.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.56%	-14.46%	+9.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.83%	-29.67%	+15.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.49%	-10.99%	+8.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.44%	-8.70%	+5.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	3.45%	-2.20%

Volatility

MUST vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) is 1.84%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 11.44%. This indicates that MUST experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MUST	XCEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.84%	11.44%	-9.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.43%	15.58%	-12.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.60%	20.20%	-13.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.38%	17.15%	-11.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.60%	19.53%	-13.93%