RVNU vs. FTMA
RVNU (Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF) and FTMA (Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - RVNU tracks the Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index while FTMA tracks the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RVNU charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FTMA.
Performance
RVNU vs. FTMA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RVNU achieves a 3.76% return, which is significantly higher than FTMA's 2.11% return.
RVNU
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 1.22%
- YTD
- 3.76%
- 6M
- 3.09%
- 1Y
- 10.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.67%
- 5Y*
- -0.18%
- 10Y*
- 1.91%
FTMA
- 1D
- 0.39%
- 1M
- 0.91%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.50%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RVNU vs. FTMA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 3.76% | -0.40% |
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 2.11% | 0.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between RVNU and FTMA is 0.49, 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 Nov 11, 2025 | 0.49 |
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
RVNU vs. FTMA — Risk / Return Rank
RVNU
FTMA
RVNU vs. FTMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU) and Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF (FTMA). 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.
| RVNU | FTMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.96 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.94 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.67 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.95 | — | — |
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
| RVNU | FTMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.96 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.02 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 1.33 | -0.94 |
Drawdowns
RVNU vs. FTMA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RVNU drawdown since its inception was -23.51%, which is greater than FTMA's maximum drawdown of -2.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RVNU and FTMA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RVNU | FTMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.51% | -2.27% | -21.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.46% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.51% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.51% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.76% | 0.00% | -2.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.98% | -0.51% | -4.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.83% | — | — |
Volatility
RVNU vs. FTMA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RVNU | FTMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.44% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.42% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.20% | 3.53% | +1.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.19% | 3.53% | +3.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.28% | 3.53% | +3.75% |
RVNU vs. FTMA - Expense Ratio Comparison
RVNU has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FTMA's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
RVNU vs. FTMA - Dividend Comparison
RVNU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, more than FTMA's 1.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 1.96% | 0.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RVNU Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF | 3.51% | 3.46% | 3.06% | 2.79% | 2.81% | 2.18% | 2.43% | 2.75% | 2.76% | 2.49% | 2.72% | 3.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RVNU and FTMA have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RVNU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RVNU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FTMA.
RVNU has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 1.96% for FTMA.
RVNU tracks Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index, while FTMA tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for RVNU and 0.35% for FTMA.
Find the right allocation for RVNU and FTMA
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