Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
MUB vs SGOV: how they differ
MUB is a bond index fund and SGOV a short-term Treasury fund, and over the year SGOV returned more, +3.8% against +0.1%.
iShares National Muni Bond ETF and iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF.
| MUB iShares National Muni Bond ETF | SGOV iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | National Muni Bond | 0-3 month T-bills |
| Total return, 1 year | +0.1% | +3.8% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −17.4 pts | −13.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.05% | 0.09% |
| Holdings | 6603 | not filed |
MUB in plain words
MUB is a bond fund tracking the National Muni Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +0.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.05% a year. It sat 3.6% below its high of Jul 6, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
SGOV in plain words
SGOV is a cash and treasury bills tracking the 0-3 month T-bills. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +3.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, MUB or SGOV?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MUB returned +0.1% and SGOV returned +3.8%, so SGOV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, MUB or SGOV?
- MUB charges 0.05% a year and SGOV charges 0.09%, so MUB is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, MUB against SGOV, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/MUB-SGOV Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources