RMCA vs. MINO

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

RMCA (Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF) and MINO (PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RMCA returned 7.55% vs 7.63% for MINO. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RMCA charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for MINO.

Performance

RMCA vs. MINO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) and PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund (MINO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMCA achieves a 3.06% return, which is significantly higher than MINO's 2.40% return.

RMCA

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 1.94%
• YTD: 3.06%
• 6M: 3.12%
• 1Y: 7.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MINO

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.78%
• YTD: 2.40%
• 6M: 2.31%
• 1Y: 7.63%
• 3Y*: 4.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMCA vs. MINO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	3.06%	2.35%	-0.24%
MINO PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund	2.40%	4.42%	0.31%

Correlation

The correlation between RMCA and MINO is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 13, 2024	0.76

The correlation between RMCA and MINO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RMCA vs. MINO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMCA

RMCA Risk / Return Rank: 76
RMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
RMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
RMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 85
RMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
RMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

MINO

MINO Risk / Return Rank: 84
MINO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
MINO Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
MINO Omega Ratio Rank: 94
MINO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
MINO Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

RMCA vs. MINO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) and PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund (MINO). 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.

	RMCA	MINO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.83	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.18	4.36	-1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.62	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.23	3.18	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.75	11.38	-0.63

RMCA vs. MINO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMCA Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the MINO Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMCA and MINO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RMCA vs. MINO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMCA drawdown since its inception was -5.95%, smaller than the maximum MINO drawdown of -15.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMCA and MINO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMCA	MINO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.95%	-15.24%	+9.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.35%	-2.41%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.58%	-4.20%	+2.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.70%	0.67%	+0.03%

Volatility

RMCA vs. MINO - Volatility Comparison

Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) has a higher volatility of 0.91% compared to PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund (MINO) at 0.72%. This indicates that RMCA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MINO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMCA	MINO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.91%	0.72%	+0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.49%	1.90%	+0.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.62%	2.71%	+0.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.32%	4.52%	+0.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.32%	4.52%	+0.80%

RMCA vs. MINO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMCA has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than MINO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMCA vs. MINO - Dividend Comparison

RMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.33%, more than MINO's 3.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MINO PIMCO Municipal Income Opportunities Active Exchange-Traded Fund	3.88%	3.71%	3.91%	3.78%	2.87%	0.29%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	4.33%	4.51%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMCA and MINO in my portfolio?

RMCA and MINO have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMCA or MINO?

RMCA has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to MINO (0.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMCA dropped -5.95% vs MINO's -15.24%.

Which ETF is better, RMCA or MINO?

On 1-year performance, MINO leads with 7.63% vs 7.55% for RMCA. On fees, MINO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, MINO has been the lower-risk option at 0.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMCA or MINO?

Over the 1-year period, MINO has performed better with a 7.63% return vs 7.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMCA or MINO?

MINO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMCA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RMCA or MINO?

RMCA has the higher dividend yield at 4.33%, compared with 3.88% for MINO.

What is the main difference between RMCA and MINO?

They also come from different issuers: Rockefeller and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for RMCA and 0.39% for MINO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 2.09), 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.