NMB vs. CA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NMB (Simplify National Muni Bond ETF) and CA (Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. NMB is actively managed, while CA is passively managed. Over the past year, NMB returned 5.78% vs 6.67% for CA. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NMB charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CA.

Performance

NMB vs. CA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify National Muni Bond ETF (NMB) and Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with NMB having a 1.19% return and CA slightly higher at 1.20%.

NMB

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 1.19%
• 6M: 0.91%
• 1Y: 5.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.20%
• 6M: 1.44%
• 1Y: 6.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NMB vs. CA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NMB Simplify National Muni Bond ETF	1.19%	7.97%	-1.90%
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF	1.20%	3.05%	-0.11%

Correlation

The correlation between NMB and CA is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2024	0.46

Return for Risk

NMB vs. CA — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMB

NMB Risk / Return Rank: 21
NMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
NMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
NMB Omega Ratio Rank: 22
NMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
NMB Martin Ratio Rank: 19

CA

CA Risk / Return Rank: 73
CA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CA Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CA Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CA Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
CA Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

NMB vs. CA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify National Muni Bond ETF (NMB) and Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA). 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.

	NMB	CA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.72	2.54	-1.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	3.84	-2.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.58	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.97	2.61	-1.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.96	9.84	-7.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NMB vs. CA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the CA Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMB and CA, 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

	NMB	CA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72	2.54	-1.83
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	0.67	-0.35

Drawdowns

NMB vs. CA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, which is greater than CA's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMB and CA.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMB	CA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.68%	-5.24%	-8.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.99%	-2.57%	-3.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.60%	-0.75%	-0.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.36%	-1.27%	-2.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.96%	0.68%	+2.28%

Volatility

NMB vs. CA - Volatility Comparison

Simplify National Muni Bond ETF (NMB) has a higher volatility of 1.74% compared to Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA) at 0.31%. This indicates that NMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMB	CA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.74%	0.31%	+1.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.42%	1.83%	+2.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.13%	2.64%	+5.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.70%	3.99%	+8.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.70%	3.99%	+8.71%

NMB vs. CA - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMB has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than CA's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMB vs. CA - Dividend Comparison

NMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.87%, more than CA's 2.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF	2.96%	3.14%	3.03%
NMB Simplify National Muni Bond ETF	5.87%	4.48%	1.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMB and CA in my portfolio?

NMB and CA have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NMB or CA?

NMB has higher volatility (1.74%) compared to CA (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMB dropped -13.68% vs CA's -5.24%.

Which ETF is better, NMB or CA?

On 1-year performance, CA leads with 6.67% vs 5.78% for NMB. On fees, CA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, CA has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NMB or CA?

Over the 1-year period, CA has performed better with a 6.67% return vs 5.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NMB or CA?

CA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for NMB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NMB or CA?

NMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.87%, compared with 2.96% for CA.

What is the main difference between NMB and CA?

They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for NMB and 0.07% for CA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 0.72), 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.