SHM vs. FLOT
SHM (SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF) and FLOT (iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SHM is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Municipal Managed Money Short, while FLOT is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Floating Rate Notes (<5 Y). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SHM returned 1.20%/yr vs 3.03%/yr for FLOT. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.
Performance
SHM vs. FLOT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SHM achieves a 0.78% return, which is significantly lower than FLOT's 1.89% return. Over the past 10 years, SHM has underperformed FLOT with an annualized return of 1.20%, while FLOT has yielded a comparatively higher 3.03% annualized return.
SHM
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.39%
- YTD
- 0.78%
- 6M
- 1.08%
- 1Y
- 3.47%
- 3Y*
- 2.93%
- 5Y*
- 0.91%
- 10Y*
- 1.20%
FLOT
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.51%
- YTD
- 1.89%
- 6M
- 2.21%
- 1Y
- 4.91%
- 3Y*
- 5.65%
- 5Y*
- 4.20%
- 10Y*
- 3.03%
SHM vs. FLOT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SHM SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF | 0.78% | 3.95% | 1.22% | 2.92% | -3.82% | -0.37% | 2.65% | 3.64% | 1.56% | 0.99% |
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 1.89% | 4.91% | 6.53% | 6.43% | 1.28% | 0.45% | 0.87% | 3.97% | 1.48% | 1.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between SHM and FLOT is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2011 | 0.04 |
The correlation between SHM and FLOT shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (all time) to 0.15 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
SHM vs. FLOT — Risk / Return Rank
SHM
FLOT
SHM vs. FLOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF (SHM) and iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT). 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.
| SHM | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -7.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 3.31 | -1.72 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.08 | 11.42 | -8.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.88 | 106.82 | -98.93 |
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
| SHM | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.76 | 6.68 | -3.92 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 | 2.38 | -1.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.36 | 0.73 | -0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.66 | -0.18 |
Drawdowns
SHM vs. FLOT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SHM drawdown since its inception was -11.61%, smaller than the maximum FLOT drawdown of -13.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SHM and FLOT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SHM | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.61% | -13.54% | +1.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.13% | -0.43% | -0.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.03% | -1.57% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.67% | -2.36% | -4.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -11.61% | -13.54% | +1.93% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | 0.00% | -0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.97% | -0.21% | -0.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.44% | 0.05% | +0.39% |
Volatility
SHM vs. FLOT - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF (SHM) has a higher volatility of 0.35% compared to iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT) at 0.18%. This indicates that SHM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SHM | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.35% | 0.18% | +0.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.85% | 0.62% | +0.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.26% | 0.74% | +0.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.07% | 1.77% | +0.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.31% | 4.15% | -0.84% |
SHM vs. FLOT - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both SHM and FLOT have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
SHM vs. FLOT - Dividend Comparison
SHM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, less than FLOT's 4.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 4.53% | 4.84% | 5.82% | 5.66% | 2.06% | 0.43% | 1.25% | 2.78% | 2.41% | 1.46% | 0.97% | 0.53% |
SHM SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF | 2.67% | 2.61% | 2.06% | 1.15% | 0.69% | 0.86% | 1.24% | 1.40% | 1.23% | 1.06% | 0.94% | 0.92% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SHM and FLOT have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SHM has higher volatility (0.35%) compared to FLOT (0.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SHM dropped -11.61% vs FLOT's -13.54%.
On 10-year performance, FLOT leads with 3.03% vs 1.20% for SHM. Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. On volatility, FLOT has been the lower-risk option at 0.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FLOT has performed better with a 3.03% return vs 1.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SHM and FLOT have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.
FLOT has the higher dividend yield at 4.53%, compared with 2.67% for SHM.
SHM is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FLOT is Corporate Bonds. SHM tracks Bloomberg Municipal Managed Money Short, while FLOT tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Notes (<5 Y). They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares.
FLOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.68 vs 2.76), 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.
Find the right allocation for SHM and FLOT
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