SHM vs. MYMF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SHM (SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF) and MYMF (State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds from State Street. SHM is passively managed, while MYMF is actively managed. Over the past year, SHM returned 3.47% vs 2.95% for MYMF. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.

Performance

SHM vs. MYMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF (SHM) and State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF (MYMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SHM achieves a 0.78% return, which is significantly higher than MYMF's 0.58% 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%

MYMF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 0.58%
• 6M: 0.81%
• 1Y: 2.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SHM vs. MYMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SHM SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF	0.78%	3.95%	-0.77%
MYMF State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF	0.58%	3.01%	0.19%

Correlation

The correlation between SHM and MYMF is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2024	0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between SHM and MYMF has dropped to 0.29 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

SHM vs. MYMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

SHM

SHM Risk / Return Rank: 75
SHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
SHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
SHM Omega Ratio Rank: 90
SHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
SHM Martin Ratio Rank: 47

MYMF

MYMF Risk / Return Rank: 96
MYMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
MYMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
MYMF Omega Ratio Rank: 98
MYMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
MYMF Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

SHM vs. MYMF - 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 State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF (MYMF). 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	MYMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	3.98	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.29	6.98	-2.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	2.21	-0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	7.79	-4.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.88	28.74	-20.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SHM vs. MYMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SHM Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is lower than the MYMF Sharpe Ratio of 3.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SHM and MYMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SHM	MYMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.76	3.98	-1.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.48	1.36	-0.88

Drawdowns

SHM vs. MYMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SHM drawdown since its inception was -11.61%, which is greater than MYMF's maximum drawdown of -2.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SHM and MYMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	SHM	MYMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.61%	-2.02%	-9.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.13%	-0.38%	-0.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-6.67%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-11.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.37%	-0.05%	-0.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.97%	-0.18%	-0.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.44%	0.10%	+0.34%

Volatility

SHM vs. MYMF - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Nuveen Bloomberg Barclays Short Term Municipal Bond ETF (SHM) has a higher volatility of 0.35% compared to State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF (MYMF) at 0.21%. This indicates that SHM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MYMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SHM	MYMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.35%	0.21%	+0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.85%	0.52%	+0.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.26%	0.75%	+0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.07%	1.65%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.31%	1.65%	+1.66%

SHM vs. MYMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SHM and MYMF 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. MYMF - Dividend Comparison

SHM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, more than MYMF's 2.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MYMF State Street My2026 Municipal Bond ETF	2.47%	2.80%	0.83%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both SHM and MYMF in my portfolio?

SHM and MYMF have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SHM or MYMF?

SHM has higher volatility (0.35%) compared to MYMF (0.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SHM dropped -11.61% vs MYMF's -2.02%.

Which ETF is better, SHM or MYMF?

On 1-year performance, SHM leads with 3.47% vs 2.95% for MYMF. Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. On volatility, MYMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SHM or MYMF?

Over the 1-year period, SHM has performed better with a 3.47% return vs 2.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SHM or MYMF?

SHM and MYMF have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SHM or MYMF?

SHM has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 2.47% for MYMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MYMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 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.