SCMB vs. AUSM

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

SCMB (Schwab Municipal Bond ETF) and AUSM (Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. SCMB is passively managed, while AUSM is actively managed. Over the past year, SCMB returned 6.17% vs 2.89% for AUSM. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SCMB charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AUSM.

Performance

SCMB vs. AUSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Municipal Bond ETF (SCMB) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with SCMB having a 1.41% return and AUSM slightly lower at 1.34%.

SCMB

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.33%
• 6M: 0.94%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 1Y: 6.17%
• 3Y*: 3.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AUSM

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.22%
• 6M: 1.16%
• YTD: 1.34%
• 1Y: 2.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SCMB vs. AUSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SCMB Schwab Municipal Bond ETF	1.41%	4.41%
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF	1.34%	1.58%

Correlation

The correlation between SCMB and AUSM is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2025	0.12

Return for Risk

SCMB vs. AUSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCMB

SCMB Risk / Return Rank: 73
SCMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
SCMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
SCMB Omega Ratio Rank: 89
SCMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
SCMB Martin Ratio Rank: 52

AUSM

AUSM Risk / Return Rank: 97
AUSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Omega Ratio Rank: 98
AUSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AUSM Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

SCMB vs. AUSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Municipal Bond ETF (SCMB) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). 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.

	SCMB	AUSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	3.96	-1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	6.86	-3.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	2.26	-0.82
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	6.94	-4.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.08	20.53	-13.45

SCMB vs. AUSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is lower than the AUSM Sharpe Ratio of 3.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCMB and AUSM, 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

SCMB vs. AUSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCMB drawdown since its inception was -6.13%, which is greater than AUSM's maximum drawdown of -0.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCMB and AUSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCMB	AUSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.13%	-0.42%	-5.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.92%	-0.42%	-2.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.54%	-0.00%	-0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.30%	-0.08%	-1.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.88%	0.14%	+0.74%

Volatility

SCMB vs. AUSM - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Municipal Bond ETF (SCMB) has a higher volatility of 0.61% compared to Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM) at 0.13%. This indicates that SCMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCMB	AUSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.61%	0.13%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.19%	0.45%	+1.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.90%	0.73%	+2.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.12%	0.73%	+3.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.12%	0.73%	+3.39%

SCMB vs. AUSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCMB has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than AUSM's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SCMB vs. AUSM - Dividend Comparison

SCMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.54%, more than AUSM's 2.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF	2.61%	1.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCMB Schwab Municipal Bond ETF	3.54%	3.36%	3.34%	3.10%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCMB and AUSM in my portfolio?

SCMB and AUSM have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCMB or AUSM?

SCMB has higher volatility (0.61%) compared to AUSM (0.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCMB dropped -6.13% vs AUSM's -0.42%.

Which ETF is better, SCMB or AUSM?

On 1-year performance, SCMB leads with 6.17% vs 2.89% for AUSM. On fees, SCMB is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, AUSM has been the lower-risk option at 0.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCMB or AUSM?

Over the 1-year period, SCMB has performed better with a 6.17% return vs 2.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCMB or AUSM?

SCMB is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for AUSM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCMB or AUSM?

SCMB has the higher dividend yield at 3.54%, compared with 2.61% for AUSM.

What is the main difference between SCMB and AUSM?

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Allspring. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for SCMB and 0.18% for AUSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.96 vs 2.14), 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.