PWZ vs. MFLX
PWZ (Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and MFLX (First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. PWZ is passively managed, while MFLX is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PWZ returned 0.17%/yr vs -0.01%/yr for MFLX. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PWZ charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.88%/yr for MFLX.
Performance
PWZ vs. MFLX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWZ achieves a 2.53% return, which is significantly lower than MFLX's 3.39% return.
PWZ
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- 0.99%
- YTD
- 2.53%
- 6M
- 2.73%
- 1Y
- 8.84%
- 3Y*
- 3.24%
- 5Y*
- 0.17%
- 10Y*
- 1.91%
MFLX
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 1.48%
- YTD
- 3.39%
- 6M
- 3.96%
- 1Y
- 9.15%
- 3Y*
- 5.50%
- 5Y*
- -0.01%
- 10Y*
- —
PWZ vs. MFLX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.53% | 1.26% | 2.16% | 6.55% | -11.35% | 1.94% | 4.90% | 8.72% | 0.32% | 6.82% |
MFLX First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF | 3.39% | 3.94% | 3.74% | 8.98% | -19.94% | 8.43% | 7.19% | 16.89% | -4.66% | 5.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWZ and MFLX is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2016 | 0.29 |
Over the past year, PWZ and MFLX have become more correlated (0.56) than their long-term average of 0.29, meaning their price movements have been converging.
PWZ vs. MFLX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PWZ
MFLX
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
PWZ
MFLX
Basic Materials
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Communication Services
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Consumer Cyclical
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Consumer Defensive
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Energy
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Healthcare
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Industrials
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Real Estate
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Technology
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
Utilities
PWZ
-
MFLX
-
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
PWZ vs. MFLX — Risk / Return Rank
PWZ
MFLX
PWZ vs. MFLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF (MFLX). 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.
| PWZ | MFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.04 | 2.25 | -0.21 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.08 | 3.44 | -0.36 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.49 | -0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.36 | 2.87 | -0.51 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.55 | 11.58 | -3.03 |
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
| PWZ | MFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.04 | 2.25 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.03 | -0.00 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 0.19 | +0.27 |
Drawdowns
PWZ vs. MFLX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWZ drawdown since its inception was -21.49%, smaller than the maximum MFLX drawdown of -26.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWZ and MFLX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWZ | MFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.49% | -26.76% | +5.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.47% | -3.11% | -0.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.09% | -8.18% | -0.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.56% | -25.88% | +8.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.56% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.48% | -3.72% | +3.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.54% | -8.17% | +4.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.96% | 0.77% | +0.19% |
Volatility
PWZ vs. MFLX - Volatility Comparison
Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF (MFLX) have volatilities of 1.39% and 1.41%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWZ | MFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.39% | 1.41% | -0.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.04% | 3.00% | +0.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.39% | 4.09% | +0.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.25% | 10.36% | -4.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.89% | 11.29% | -5.40% |
PWZ vs. MFLX - Expense Ratio Comparison
PWZ has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than MFLX's 0.88% expense ratio.
Dividends
PWZ vs. MFLX - Dividend Comparison
PWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, less than MFLX's 4.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFLX First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF | 4.07% | 4.06% | 3.81% | 3.65% | 4.27% | 3.69% | 3.21% | 2.94% | 3.74% | 3.80% | 0.98% | 0.00% |
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.57% | 3.41% | 3.28% | 2.84% | 2.49% | 2.28% | 2.34% | 2.51% | 2.53% | 2.48% | 2.86% | 3.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PWZ and MFLX have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MFLX has higher volatility (1.41%) compared to PWZ (1.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWZ dropped -21.49% vs MFLX's -26.76%.
On 5-year performance, PWZ leads with 0.17% vs -0.01% for MFLX. On fees, PWZ is cheaper at 0.28% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PWZ has performed better with a 0.17% return vs -0.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PWZ is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for MFLX.
MFLX has the higher dividend yield at 4.07%, compared with 3.57% for PWZ.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PWZ and 0.88% for MFLX.
MFLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 2.04), 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.
Find the right allocation for PWZ and MFLX
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