TAFM vs. PUSH
TAFM (AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF) and PUSH (PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TAFM returned 7.39% vs 3.85% for PUSH. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TAFM charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PUSH.
Performance
TAFM vs. PUSH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TAFM achieves a 1.91% return, which is significantly higher than PUSH's 1.32% return.
TAFM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.81%
- YTD
- 1.91%
- 6M
- 2.26%
- 1Y
- 7.39%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PUSH
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 3.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TAFM vs. PUSH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TAFM AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF | 1.91% | 4.21% | 1.98% |
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 1.32% | 4.16% | 1.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between TAFM and PUSH is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024 | 0.35 |
The correlation between TAFM and PUSH shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), 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
TAFM vs. PUSH — Risk / Return Rank
TAFM
PUSH
TAFM vs. PUSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF (TAFM) and PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). 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.
| TAFM | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.71 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.76 | 7.72 | -4.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.84 | 19.17 | -9.33 |
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
| TAFM | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.31 | 2.54 | -0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | 2.91 | -2.07 |
Drawdowns
TAFM vs. PUSH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TAFM drawdown since its inception was -4.74%, which is greater than PUSH's maximum drawdown of -0.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TAFM and PUSH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TAFM | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.74% | -0.85% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.69% | -0.50% | -2.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | 0.00% | -0.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.95% | -0.11% | -0.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.75% | 0.20% | +0.55% |
Volatility
TAFM vs. PUSH - Volatility Comparison
AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF (TAFM) has a higher volatility of 1.00% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) at 0.30%. This indicates that TAFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PUSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TAFM | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.00% | 0.30% | +0.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.15% | 0.98% | +1.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.22% | 1.52% | +1.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.95% | 1.30% | +3.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.95% | 1.30% | +3.65% |
TAFM vs. PUSH - Expense Ratio Comparison
TAFM has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than PUSH's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
TAFM vs. PUSH - Dividend Comparison
TAFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.64%, more than PUSH's 3.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 3.23% | 3.45% | 1.86% | 0.00% |
TAFM AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF | 3.64% | 3.51% | 3.35% | 0.18% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TAFM and PUSH have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TAFM has higher volatility (1.00%) compared to PUSH (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TAFM dropped -4.74% vs PUSH's -0.85%.
On 1-year performance, TAFM leads with 7.39% vs 3.85% for PUSH. On fees, PUSH is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PUSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TAFM has performed better with a 7.39% return vs 3.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PUSH is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for TAFM.
TAFM has the higher dividend yield at 3.64%, compared with 3.23% for PUSH.
They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for TAFM and 0.15% for PUSH.
PUSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.31), 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 TAFM and PUSH
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