BSMSvsCMFETF Comparison
VS
Invesco BulletShares 2028 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMS) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) belong to the same industry segment: Municipal Bonds. BSMS's top 1 sector exposures are Municipal. In contrast, CMF's top sector exposures are Municipal and Non-Corporate. BSMS is more expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.18%, versus 0.08% for CMF. BSMS is down -1.1% year-to-date (YTD) with +$98M in YTD flows. CMF performs worse with -2.36% YTD performance, and +$1.60B in YTD flows. Run a side-by-side ETF comparison of BSMS and CMF below, and assess how they stack up in performance, liquidity, risk, exposure, holdings, and more, helping you select the best ETF for your investments.
Find out how industry players manage ETF portfolios. Discover our library of Model portfolios
BSMS vs CMF performance and flow charts
Performance
Cumulative Flows
Historic performance and flows
Data as of 10/16/2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | BSMS CMF | -0.16%-0.25% | -1.24%-3.34% | -1.10%-2.36% | -0.57%-1.71% | +9.50%+9.17% | -1.27%+0.25% |
| Flows | BSMS CMF | +$14M+$660M | +$37M+$801M | +$98M+$1.60B | +$117M+$1.96B | +$275M+$3.16B | +$330M+$3.62B |
Volatility and drawdown
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | BSMS CMF | +2.60%+4.84% | +1.58%+3.08% | +2.28%+3.57% | +2.93%+3.58% |
| Max drawdown | BSMS CMF | -2.72%-5.69% | -3.43%-6.52% | -3.43%-6.52% | -14.28%-12.25% |
| Max drawdown duration | BSMS CMF | 92d92d | 236d229d | 236d229d | 1748d1346d |
Trading data
BSMS | CMF | |
Last sale 10/16/2026 at 1:30 PM | $23.05 | $54.82 |
| Previous close 10/15/2026 | $23.08 | $54.79 |
| Consolidated volume 10/15/2026 | ||
| Average volume 30 days | ||
| Average discount or premium 30 days | ||
| Average Bid/Ask spread 30 days |
Replication quality
Data as of October 18, 2026
1-year trailing difference
Create an account to view replication metrics
Join for free
BSMS | CMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking error | ||
| Tracking difference | ||
| 1 year cumulative return difference | ||
| Best | ||
| Worst | ||
| Daily return difference | ||
| Average | ||
| Worst | ||
Advertisement
Main metrics
Last update 10/16/2026 at 1:30 PM
Live
Closed
BSMS | CMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | $23.05 | $54.82 |
| 1D performance | -0.11% | +0.05% |
| AuM | $342.62 M | $5.19 B |
| E/R | 0.18% | 0.08% |
Characteristics
BSMS | CMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Management strategy | Passive | Passive |
| Provider | Invesco | iShares |
| Benchmark | ICE BulletShares USD Municipal Bond 2028 Index | ICE AMT-Free California Municipal Index |
| N° of holdings | 1194 | 903 |
| Asset class | Fixed Income | - |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | Join | Join |
| Inception date | September 13, 2019 | October 4, 2007 |
| ESG | No | No |
Exposure
Countries
BSMS
USA
63.9%
Other
36.1%
CMF
USA
59.23%
Other
40.77%
Sectors
BSMS
Municipal
63.9%
Other
36.1%
CMF
Municipal
59.23%
Other
40.77%
Advertisement
Diversification
BSMS
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
4.82%
CMF
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
6.39%
Top 15 holdings
Data as of August 31, 2026
BSMS
Illinois, 5% 1nov2028, USD (2017D)
0.49%
Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, 5% 1feb2028, USD (2025A)
0.48%
Texas Water Development Board, 5% 15apr2049, USD (2018B)
0.48%
North Texas Tollway Authority, 5% 1jan2043, USD (2017A)
0.39%
New Jersey, 5% 1jun2028, USD
0.38%
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, 5% 1jul2028, USD (2025)
0.34%
Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, 5% 1mar2028, USD (2025A)
0.30%
Los Angeles Unified School District, 5.25% 1jul2042, USD
0.29%
Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 5% 1jul2044, USD (2019-A)
0.28%
County of Clark (NV), 5% 1may2048, USD
0.25%
Grand Parkway Transportation Corp., 5% 1oct2048, USD (2018A)
0.24%
New Jersey Economic Development Authority, 5% 1mar2028, USD (2023)
0.23%
Grand Parkway Transportation Corp., 5% 1oct2043, USD (2018A)
0.23%
Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, 5% 1jul2043, USD
0.22%
New York Dormitory Authority, 5% 15mar2048, USD (2018)
0.22%
CMF
Orange Water District, FRN 1aug2042, USD (2003A)
0.60%
US79766DLC10
0.52%
US032556NJ70
0.49%
Los Angeles Unified School District, 5% 1jul2031, USD (2024)
0.47%
University of California, 5.5% 15may2040, USD
0.46%
California Educational Facilities Authority, 5% 1may2045, USD
0.44%
US4636324Q95
0.44%
US79905CAB90
0.42%
Los Angeles Unified School District, 5% 1jul2034, USD (2024A)
0.41%
US13077DUT70
0.40%
University of California, 5% 15may2036, USD (2025)
0.39%
California, 5% 1mar2055, USD
0.37%
California, 5.25% 1aug2032, USD
0.34%
US91412GSH91
0.32%
East AWP Joint Powers Authority, 3.125% 1sep2026, USD (2024A)
0.32%
Frequently asked questions about BSMS and CMF
How have the BSMS and CMF ETFs performed in 2026?
As of October 16, 2026, BSMS is down -1.1% year-to-date (YTD), while CMF has lost -2.36%. That puts BSMS better performer ahead so far this year.
Which ETF is attracting more investor money: BSMS or CMF?
Year-to-date, the BSMS ETF saw +$98M in flows, compared to +$1.60B for CMF.
Which ETF is more volatile: BSMS or CMF?
Over the past year, BSMS had a volatility of 1.58%, while CMF experienced 3.08%.
Which ETF is bigger: BSMS or CMF?
As of October 16, 2026, BSMS holds $342.62 M in assets under management (AUM), while CMF manages $5.19 B.
What sectors do the BSMS and CMF ETFs invest in?
BSMS leans toward sectors like Municipal. Meanwhile, CMF focuses on Municipal.
What are the top holdings of the BSMS ETF and CMF ETF?
BSMS top holdings include Illinois, 5% 1nov2028, USD (2017D), Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, 5% 1feb2028, USD (2025A) and Texas Water Development Board, 5% 15apr2049, USD (2018B). CMF holds in its top three: Orange Water District, FRN 1aug2042, USD (2003A), US79766DLC10 and US032556NJ70.
Which ETF is more diversified: BSMS or CMF?
BSMS holds 2335 securities with 4.82% of its assets in the top 15. CMF has 1670 securities and a top 15 weight of 6.39%.
Advertisement
Latest news about BSMS & CMF
Advertisement
