A
vs
B
Share
Compare their flowsAsk IQ about these two funds

FMB vs PZA: Differences, Returns & Fees

FMB's duration was 6.8 years on Jul 31, 2026 and PZA's 8.6 on May 31, 2026; PZA charges 0.28% to FMB's 0.39%. Net assets on Oct 9, 2026: $1.9bn for First Trust Managed Municipal ETF and $4.0bn for Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF.

PZA costs 0.11 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 2.3 points; PZA is 2.1 times larger.

FMBPZA
Expense ratio0.39%0.28%
Net assets$1.9bn$4.0bn
Total return, 1 year−2.1%−4.4%
What it tracksNo index, actively managednot read by ETFIQ
Holdings in common1%
Below its high5.8%, high on Jul 6, 20268.7%, high on Jul 19, 2021

Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.

−2.1%
FMB total return, 1 year
−4.4%
PZA total return, 1 year
0.39%
FMB expense ratio
0.28%
PZA expense ratio

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FMB and PZA hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.

half

1% in common

Positions both hold, largest shared weight first
Holding FMB PZA
CO COSMED 5 08/01/2044, due Aug 1, 2044 0.11% 0.08%
NJ NJSTRN 5.25 06/15/2050, due Jun 15, 2050 0.15% 0.05%
TX TXS 5 10/01/2044, due Oct 1, 2044 0.16% 0.05%
IL ILS 5.5 03/01/2047, due Mar 1, 2047 0.09% 0.05%
FL HILMEC 5.25 11/15/2049, due Nov 15, 2049 0.10% 0.04%
MI MISFIN 4 02/15/2044, due Feb 15, 2044 0.11% 0.04%
IL ILS 5.5 03/01/2042, due Mar 1, 2042 0.17% 0.04%
AZ SALAGR 5 01/01/2051, due Jan 1, 2051 0.08% 0.04%
CO COSMED 4 08/01/2049, due Aug 1, 2049 0.07% 0.04%
TX TXSWTR 5 10/15/2049, due Oct 15, 2049 0.08% 0.04%
PA GEIMED 4 02/15/2047, due Feb 15, 2047 0.08% 0.03%
TX TXS 5 10/01/2043, due Oct 1, 2043 0.08% 0.03%
Only in FMB
KY MEADEV 08/01/2061, due Aug 1, 2061 0.79%
GA MAIUTL 09/01/2052, due Sep 1, 2052 0.71%
AL BBEUTL 10/01/2052, due Oct 1, 2052 0.50%
NY NYCGEN 4 11/01/2037, due Nov 1, 2037 0.48%
AL ESDPWR 11/01/2053, due Nov 1, 2053 0.44%
TX TMGUTL 01/01/2054, due Jan 1, 2054 0.44%
TN TNSUTL 5 11/01/2034, due Nov 1, 2034 0.44%
GA ATLAPT 4 07/01/2037, due Jul 1, 2037 0.43%
Only in PZA
California (State of) Health Facilities Financing Authority (Kaiser Permanente), Subseries 2017 A-2, RB, due Nov 1, 2044 0.13%
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority, Series 2024 A, Ref. RB, due Jul 1, 2054 0.12%
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority, Series 2020 D, Ref. RB, due Feb 15, 2047 0.11%
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District, Series 2025 C, RB, due Jan 1, 2055 0.10%
Texas Water Development Board, Series 2025, RB, due Oct 15, 2055 0.10%
Regents of the University of California Medical Center, Series 2022 P, RB, due May 15, 2047 0.10%
Regents of the University of California Medical Center, Series 2022 P, RB, due May 15, 2053 0.10%
Orange (County of), FL Health Facilities Authority (Orlando Health Obligated Group), Series 2025, Ref. RB, due Oct 1, 2056 0.10%

Check overlap with more funds →

On the same fields

FMB
First Trust Managed Municipal ETF
PZA
Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF
Where it sits Bond ETF Bond ETF
Issuer First Trust Invesco
What it is Actively managed Tracks an index
Total return, 1 year −2.1% −4.4%
S&P 500 over the same days +17.3% +17.3%
Gap to the S&P 500 −19.4 pts −21.6 pts
Expense ratio 0.39% 0.28%
Holdings 1249 7334
Net assets $1.9bn $4.0bn

FMB and PZA on the fields both publish, as of Oct 9, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FMB in plain words

FMB is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned −2.1% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.39% a year. It sat 5.8% below its high of Jul 6, 2026 on Oct 9, 2026.

PZA in plain words

PZA tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned −4.4% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.28% a year. It sat 8.7% below its high of Jul 19, 2021 on Oct 9, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FMB or PZA?
In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FMB returned −2.1% and PZA −4.4%.
Which is cheaper, FMB or PZA?
PZA is cheaper, by 0.11 percentage points a year. That is about $11 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
FMB vs TFIFMB vs LMUBFMB vs TAFMFMB vs MUBPZA vs TAFMPZA vs VCRMPZA vs TFIPZA vs SCMB
FMB on its own →PZA on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →Standards and sources →
Where these figures came from
FMB filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FMB prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗First Trust page for FMB ↗PZA filings on SEC EDGAR ↗PZA prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Invesco page for PZA ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, FMB against PZA, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fmb-vs-pza

Open data

Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.