TOAK vs. CMF
TOAK (Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF) and CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TOAK is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Twin Oak, while CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. TOAK is actively managed, while CMF is passively managed. Over the past year, TOAK returned 3.70% vs 6.72% for CMF. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.
Performance
TOAK vs. CMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TOAK achieves a 1.32% return, which is significantly higher than CMF's 0.96% return.
TOAK
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.24%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- 1Y
- 3.70%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMF
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- 0.96%
- 6M
- 1.33%
- 1Y
- 6.72%
- 3Y*
- 3.31%
- 5Y*
- 0.66%
- 10Y*
- 1.75%
TOAK vs. CMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TOAK Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF | 1.32% | 4.28% | 1.51% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 0.96% | 3.36% | 0.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between TOAK and CMF is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024 | -0.05 |
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
TOAK vs. CMF — Risk / Return Rank
TOAK
CMF
TOAK vs. CMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF (TOAK) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF). 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.
| TOAK | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.77 | 1.54 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.05 | 2.32 | -0.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.11 | 7.79 | +0.32 |
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
| TOAK | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.27 | 2.41 | -1.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.16 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.82 | 0.39 | +1.43 |
Drawdowns
TOAK vs. CMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TOAK drawdown since its inception was -1.81%, smaller than the maximum CMF drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TOAK and CMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TOAK | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.81% | -16.45% | +14.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.81% | -2.91% | +1.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.22% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.57% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.72% | -0.92% | -0.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.10% | -4.77% | +4.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.46% | 0.86% | -0.40% |
Volatility
TOAK vs. CMF - Volatility Comparison
Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF (TOAK) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) at 0.85%. This indicates that TOAK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TOAK | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.72% | 0.85% | +1.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.89% | 2.11% | +0.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92% | 2.80% | +0.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.22% | 4.19% | -1.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.22% | 5.08% | -2.86% |
TOAK vs. CMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both TOAK and CMF have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
TOAK vs. CMF - Dividend Comparison
TOAK has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.95% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
TOAK Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TOAK and CMF have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TOAK has higher volatility (2.72%) compared to CMF (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TOAK dropped -1.81% vs CMF's -16.45%.
On 1-year performance, CMF leads with 6.72% vs 3.70% for TOAK. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CMF has performed better with a 6.72% return vs 3.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TOAK and CMF have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.
CMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.00% for TOAK.
TOAK is categorized as Multistrategy, while CMF is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Twin Oak and iShares.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.27), 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 TOAK and CMF
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