PWZ vs. RMNY

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PWZ (Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and RMNY (Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. PWZ is passively managed, while RMNY is actively managed. Over the past year, PWZ returned 8.84% vs 8.14% for RMNY. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PWZ charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for RMNY.

Performance

PWZ vs. RMNY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF (RMNY). 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 PWZ having a 2.53% return and RMNY slightly higher at 2.59%.

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%

RMNY

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 2.59%
• 6M: 2.95%
• 1Y: 8.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PWZ vs. RMNY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF	2.53%	1.26%	0.25%
RMNY Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF	2.59%	2.35%	0.86%

Correlation

The correlation between PWZ and RMNY is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2024	0.66

The correlation between PWZ and RMNY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PWZ vs. RMNY — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWZ

PWZ Risk / Return Rank: 58
PWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
PWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 69
PWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
PWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 50

RMNY

RMNY Risk / Return Rank: 64
RMNY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
RMNY Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RMNY Omega Ratio Rank: 71
RMNY Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
RMNY Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

PWZ vs. RMNY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF (RMNY). 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	RMNY	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.07	-0.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	3.11	-0.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.43	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	3.30	-0.94
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.55	10.86	-2.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PWZ vs. RMNY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the RMNY Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWZ and RMNY, 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

	PWZ	RMNY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	2.07	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	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	0.63	-0.17

Drawdowns

PWZ vs. RMNY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWZ drawdown since its inception was -21.49%, which is greater than RMNY's maximum drawdown of -5.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWZ and RMNY.

Drawdown Indicators

	PWZ	RMNY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.49%	-5.70%	-15.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.47%	-2.28%	-1.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.09%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.56%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	0.00%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.54%	-1.54%	-2.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	0.69%	+0.27%

Volatility

PWZ vs. RMNY - Volatility Comparison

Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) has a higher volatility of 1.39% compared to Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF (RMNY) at 1.28%. This indicates that PWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RMNY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PWZ	RMNY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.39%	1.28%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.04%	2.69%	+0.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.39%	3.99%	+0.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.25%	5.19%	+1.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.89%	5.19%	+0.70%

PWZ vs. RMNY - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWZ has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than RMNY's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

PWZ vs. RMNY - Dividend Comparison

PWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, less than RMNY's 4.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
RMNY Rockefeller New York Municipal Bond ETF	4.30%	4.10%	1.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PWZ and RMNY in my portfolio?

PWZ and RMNY have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PWZ or RMNY?

PWZ has higher volatility (1.39%) compared to RMNY (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWZ dropped -21.49% vs RMNY's -5.70%.

Which ETF is better, PWZ or RMNY?

On 1-year performance, PWZ leads with 8.84% vs 8.14% for RMNY. On fees, PWZ is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, RMNY has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PWZ or RMNY?

Over the 1-year period, PWZ has performed better with a 8.84% return vs 8.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PWZ or RMNY?

PWZ is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMNY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PWZ or RMNY?

RMNY has the higher dividend yield at 4.30%, compared with 3.57% for PWZ.

What is the main difference between PWZ and RMNY?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Rockefeller. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PWZ and 0.55% for RMNY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RMNY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 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.