PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QIS vs. BSMU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QIS vs. BSMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Multi-Qis Alternative ETF (QIS) and Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QIS achieves a -28.64% return, which is significantly lower than BSMU's 0.71% return.


QIS

1D
-0.88%
1M
-19.76%
YTD
-28.64%
6M
-29.46%
1Y
-49.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BSMU

1D
-0.28%
1M
0.89%
YTD
0.71%
6M
0.84%
1Y
4.93%
3Y*
2.69%
5Y*
-0.63%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QIS vs. BSMU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
QIS
Simplify Multi-Qis Alternative ETF
-28.64%-38.02%0.19%2.08%
BSMU
Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF
0.71%4.35%-0.29%3.90%

Correlation

The correlation between QIS and BSMU is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2023

-0.03

The correlation between QIS and BSMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

QIS vs. BSMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

QIS
QIS Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
QIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 00
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
QIS Omega Ratio Rank: 00
Omega Ratio Rank
QIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
QIS Martin Ratio Rank: 11
Martin Ratio Rank

BSMU
BSMU Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
BSMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BSMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
BSMU Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
BSMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
BSMU Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QIS vs. BSMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Multi-Qis Alternative ETF (QIS) and Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


QISBSMUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.77

1.50

-0.73

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.92

2.40

-3.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.56

7.13

-8.68

QIS vs. BSMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QIS Sharpe Ratio is -1.28, which is lower than the BSMU Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QIS and BSMU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QIS vs. BSMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QIS drawdown since its inception was -58.39%, which is greater than BSMU's maximum drawdown of -19.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QIS and BSMU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QISBSMUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.39%

-19.48%

-38.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-54.12%

-2.06%

-52.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-58.16%

-4.69%

-53.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.39%

-8.16%

-6.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

31.91%

0.69%

+31.22%

Volatility

QIS vs. BSMU - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Multi-Qis Alternative ETF (QIS) has a higher volatility of 11.73% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) at 0.71%. This indicates that QIS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QISBSMUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.73%

0.71%

+11.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

30.32%

1.56%

+28.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.95%

2.15%

+36.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.36%

4.82%

+24.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.36%

4.83%

+24.53%

QIS vs. BSMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

QIS has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMU's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

QIS vs. BSMU - Dividend Comparison

QIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, less than BSMU's 3.04% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BSMU
Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF
3.04%2.82%2.92%2.66%2.16%1.60%0.28%
QIS
Simplify Multi-Qis Alternative ETF
1.89%3.37%1.07%3.29%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QIS and BSMU have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QIS has higher volatility (11.73%) compared to BSMU (0.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QIS dropped -58.39% vs BSMU's -19.48%.

On 1-year performance, BSMU leads with 4.93% vs -49.65% for QIS. On fees, BSMU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BSMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BSMU has performed better with a 4.93% return vs -49.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BSMU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for QIS.

BSMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 1.89% for QIS.

QIS is categorized as Multistrategy, while BSMU is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for QIS and 0.18% for BSMU.

BSMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs -1.28), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QIS and BSMU

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