PZT vs. AMUN
PZT (Invesco New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. PZT is passively managed, while AMUN is actively managed. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PZT charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AMUN.
Performance
PZT vs. AMUN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PZT achieves a 2.87% return, which is significantly higher than AMUN's 1.11% return.
PZT
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 1.38%
- YTD
- 2.87%
- 6M
- 3.17%
- 1Y
- 9.52%
- 3Y*
- 3.35%
- 5Y*
- -0.03%
- 10Y*
- 1.90%
AMUN
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 1.11%
- 6M
- 1.36%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PZT vs. AMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PZT Invesco New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.87% | -0.17% |
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.11% | 0.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between PZT and AMUN is 0.22, 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 21, 2025 | 0.22 |
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
PZT vs. AMUN — Risk / Return Rank
PZT
AMUN
PZT vs. AMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PZT) and abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN). 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.
| PZT | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.02 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.29 | — | — |
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
| PZT | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.02 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.00 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.37 | 2.05 | -1.68 |
Drawdowns
PZT vs. AMUN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PZT drawdown since its inception was -22.73%, which is greater than AMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PZT and AMUN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PZT | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.73% | -0.61% | -22.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.17% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.00% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.13% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.42% | -0.02% | -1.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.91% | -0.09% | -3.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.93% | — | — |
Volatility
PZT vs. AMUN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PZT | AMUN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.10% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.45% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.75% | 1.01% | +3.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.62% | 1.01% | +5.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.96% | 1.01% | +5.95% |
PZT vs. AMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison
PZT has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than AMUN's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
PZT vs. AMUN - Dividend Comparison
PZT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%, more than AMUN's 1.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF | 1.89% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PZT Invesco New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.58% | 3.43% | 3.04% | 2.82% | 2.66% | 2.77% | 2.55% | 2.73% | 3.01% | 2.94% | 3.36% | 3.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PZT and AMUN have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AMUN is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AMUN is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for PZT.
PZT has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 1.89% for AMUN.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PZT and 0.25% for AMUN.
Find the right allocation for PZT and AMUN
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