RMOP vs. CGHM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RMOP (Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF) and CGHM (Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF) are both High Yield Muni funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RMOP returned 9.29% vs 8.87% for CGHM. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RMOP charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for CGHM.

Performance

RMOP vs. CGHM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP) and Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMOP achieves a 3.85% return, which is significantly higher than CGHM's 3.08% return.

RMOP

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 2.28%
• YTD: 3.85%
• 6M: 4.10%
• 1Y: 9.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGHM

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.86%
• YTD: 3.08%
• 6M: 3.34%
• 1Y: 8.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RMOP vs. CGHM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RMOP Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF	3.85%	3.90%	2.55%
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	3.08%	4.56%	0.67%

Correlation

The correlation between RMOP and CGHM is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 13, 2024	0.75

The correlation between RMOP and CGHM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RMOP vs. CGHM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMOP

RMOP Risk / Return Rank: 82
RMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
RMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
RMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
RMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
RMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 74

CGHM

CGHM Risk / Return Rank: 86
CGHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CGHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CGHM Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CGHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CGHM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

RMOP vs. CGHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP) and Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM). 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.

	RMOP	CGHM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.48	2.87	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	4.22	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.65	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.51	3.50	+0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.59	13.55	-0.96

RMOP vs. CGHM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMOP Sharpe Ratio is 2.48, which is comparable to the CGHM Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMOP and CGHM, 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

RMOP vs. CGHM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMOP drawdown since its inception was -6.67%, which is greater than CGHM's maximum drawdown of -5.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMOP and CGHM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMOP	CGHM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.67%	-5.90%	-0.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.66%	-2.55%	-0.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.04%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.48%	-1.21%	-0.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.74%	0.66%	+0.08%

Volatility

RMOP vs. CGHM - Volatility Comparison

Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF (RMOP) has a higher volatility of 0.95% compared to Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM) at 0.74%. This indicates that RMOP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMOP	CGHM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.95%	0.74%	+0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.67%	2.23%	+0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.76%	3.11%	+0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.59%	4.47%	+1.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.59%	4.47%	+1.12%

RMOP vs. CGHM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMOP has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than CGHM's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMOP vs. CGHM - Dividend Comparison

RMOP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%, more than CGHM's 3.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	3.79%	3.61%	1.78%
RMOP Rockefeller Opportunistic Municipal Bond ETF	5.18%	5.15%	1.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMOP and CGHM in my portfolio?

RMOP and CGHM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMOP or CGHM?

RMOP has higher volatility (0.95%) compared to CGHM (0.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMOP dropped -6.67% vs CGHM's -5.90%.

Which ETF is better, RMOP or CGHM?

On 1-year performance, RMOP leads with 9.29% vs 8.87% for CGHM. On fees, CGHM is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, CGHM has been the lower-risk option at 0.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMOP or CGHM?

Over the 1-year period, RMOP has performed better with a 9.29% return vs 8.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMOP or CGHM?

CGHM is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMOP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RMOP or CGHM?

RMOP has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 3.79% for CGHM.

What is the main difference between RMOP and CGHM?

They also come from different issuers: Rockefeller and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for RMOP and 0.34% for CGHM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.48), 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.