RMCA vs. ZMUN

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

RMCA (Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF) and ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. RMCA is actively managed, while ZMUN is passively managed. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMCA charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZMUN.

Performance

RMCA vs. ZMUN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) and F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMCA achieves a 2.66% return, which is significantly higher than ZMUN's 2.03% return.

RMCA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.14%
• 6M: 2.15%
• YTD: 2.66%
• 1Y: 9.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZMUN

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.29%
• 6M: 1.83%
• YTD: 2.03%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMCA vs. ZMUN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	2.66%	1.17%
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF	2.03%	0.67%

Correlation

The correlation between RMCA and ZMUN is 0.18, 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 Sep 30, 2025	0.18

Return for Risk

RMCA vs. ZMUN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMCA

RMCA Risk / Return Rank: 92
RMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
RMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
RMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
RMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 91

ZMUN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. ZMUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) and F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN). 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	ZMUN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.96	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.86	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.86	—	—

Drawdowns

RMCA vs. ZMUN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMCA drawdown since its inception was -5.95%, which is greater than ZMUN's maximum drawdown of -0.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMCA and ZMUN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMCA	ZMUN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.95%	-0.13%	-5.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.35%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.84%	0.00%	-0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.54%	-0.02%	-1.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.57%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RMCA	ZMUN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.77%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.53%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.54%	0.54%	+3.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.25%	0.54%	+4.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.25%	0.54%	+4.71%

RMCA vs. ZMUN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMCA has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than ZMUN's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMCA vs. ZMUN - Dividend Comparison

RMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.37%, more than ZMUN's 2.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	4.37%	4.51%	1.20%
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF	2.59%	0.70%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMCA and ZMUN in my portfolio?

RMCA and ZMUN have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RMCA or ZMUN?

On fees, ZMUN is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMCA or ZMUN?

ZMUN is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMCA.

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

RMCA has the higher dividend yield at 4.37%, compared with 2.59% for ZMUN.

What is the main difference between RMCA and ZMUN?

They also come from different issuers: Rockefeller and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for RMCA and 0.30% for ZMUN.