NYF vs. ZMUN
NYF (iShares New York Muni Bond ETF) and ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - NYF tracks the S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index while ZMUN tracks the Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NYF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZMUN.
Performance
NYF vs. ZMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with NYF having a 1.51% return and ZMUN slightly higher at 1.57%.
NYF
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 1.91%
- 1Y
- 6.81%
- 3Y*
- 3.36%
- 5Y*
- 0.83%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
ZMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NYF vs. ZMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 1.51% | 1.35% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 1.57% | 0.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between NYF and ZMUN is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.18 |
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
NYF vs. ZMUN — Risk / Return Rank
NYF
ZMUN
NYF vs. ZMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares New York Muni Bond ETF (NYF) and F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN). 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.
| NYF | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.88 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NYF | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.40 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 6.46 | -5.99 |
Drawdowns
NYF vs. ZMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NYF drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, which is greater than ZMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NYF and ZMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NYF | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.12% | -0.09% | -13.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.68% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.71% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.56% | -0.02% | -0.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.31% | -0.01% | -2.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.77% | — | — |
Volatility
NYF vs. ZMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NYF | ZMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.95% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.08% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.78% | 0.54% | +2.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.00% | 0.54% | +3.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.48% | 0.54% | +3.94% |
NYF vs. ZMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
NYF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ZMUN's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
NYF vs. ZMUN - Dividend Comparison
NYF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.09%, more than ZMUN's 2.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 3.09% | 2.99% | 2.77% | 2.36% | 2.04% | 1.85% | 1.98% | 2.19% | 2.48% | 2.46% | 2.43% | 2.60% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 2.28% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NYF and ZMUN have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NYF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NYF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ZMUN.
NYF has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 2.28% for ZMUN.
NYF tracks S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while ZMUN tracks Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for NYF and 0.30% for ZMUN.
Find the right allocation for NYF and ZMUN
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