UFIV vs. MTBA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

UFIV (F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF) and MTBA (Simplify MBS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UFIV is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA Current 5-Year US Treasury Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while MTBA is a Mortgage Backed Securities fund actively managed by Simplify. UFIV is passively managed, while MTBA is actively managed. Over the past year, UFIV returned 2.11% vs 4.42% for MTBA. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

UFIV vs. MTBA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF (UFIV) and Simplify MBS ETF (MTBA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UFIV achieves a -0.63% return, which is significantly lower than MTBA's -0.06% return.

UFIV

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: -0.63%
• 6M: -0.45%
• 1Y: 2.11%
• 3Y*: 3.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MTBA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: -0.06%
• 6M: 0.09%
• 1Y: 4.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UFIV vs. MTBA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
UFIV F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF	-0.63%	6.89%	1.09%	3.91%
MTBA Simplify MBS ETF	-0.06%	7.74%	1.99%	3.67%

Correlation

The correlation between UFIV and MTBA is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023	0.88

The correlation between UFIV and MTBA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UFIV vs. MTBA — Risk / Return Rank

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

UFIV

UFIV Risk / Return Rank: 19
UFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
UFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
UFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 18
UFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
UFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 19

MTBA

MTBA Risk / Return Rank: 39
MTBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
MTBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
MTBA Omega Ratio Rank: 44
MTBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
MTBA Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

UFIV vs. MTBA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF (UFIV) and Simplify MBS ETF (MTBA). 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.

	UFIV	MTBA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.67	1.43	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	2.02	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.28	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.78	1.57	-0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.08	4.96	-2.87

UFIV vs. MTBA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UFIV Sharpe Ratio is 0.67, which is lower than the MTBA Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UFIV and MTBA, 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

UFIV vs. MTBA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UFIV drawdown since its inception was -5.63%, which is greater than MTBA's maximum drawdown of -3.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UFIV and MTBA.

Drawdown Indicators

	UFIV	MTBA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.63%	-3.48%	-2.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.71%	-2.82%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.10%	-1.44%	-0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.56%	-0.80%	-0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.02%	0.89%	+0.13%

Volatility

UFIV vs. MTBA - Volatility Comparison

F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF (UFIV) and Simplify MBS ETF (MTBA) have volatilities of 1.00% and 0.96%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UFIV	MTBA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.00%	0.96%	+0.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.35%	2.57%	-0.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.19%	3.10%	+0.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.37%	3.95%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.37%	3.95%	+0.42%

UFIV vs. MTBA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UFIV and MTBA have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

UFIV vs. MTBA - Dividend Comparison

UFIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, less than MTBA's 6.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MTBA Simplify MBS ETF	6.08%	5.98%	6.03%	0.48%
UFIV F/m US Treasury 5 Year Note ETF	3.57%	3.66%	4.00%	2.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UFIV and MTBA in my portfolio?

UFIV and MTBA have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UFIV or MTBA?

UFIV has higher volatility (1.00%) compared to MTBA (0.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UFIV dropped -5.63% vs MTBA's -3.48%.

Which ETF is better, UFIV or MTBA?

On 1-year performance, MTBA leads with 4.42% vs 2.11% for UFIV. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UFIV or MTBA?

Over the 1-year period, MTBA has performed better with a 4.42% return vs 2.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UFIV or MTBA?

UFIV and MTBA have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UFIV or MTBA?

MTBA has the higher dividend yield at 6.08%, compared with 3.57% for UFIV.

What is the main difference between UFIV and MTBA?

UFIV is categorized as Government Bonds, while MTBA is Mortgage Backed Securities. They also come from different issuers: US Benchmark Series and Simplify.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MTBA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.67), 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.