ICSH ranks 1st and BAMU 70th of 78 funds in the Cash & Ultra-Short Income Category.
BAMU vs ICSH
ICSH −0.92pt a year
1.00%0.08%
ICSH 199.8×the volume
8.37K1.67M
ICSH +1.5pt
+3.4%+4.9%
BAMU vs ICSH Performance
+2.8%+3.7%
- BAMU 1.00%
- ICSH 0.08%, better
- BAMU $66M
- ICSH $8.91B
- BAMU +2.8%
- ICSH +3.7%, better
- BAMU 2.90%
- ICSH 4.12%, better
- BAMU 7
- ICSH 401
- BAMU 8.37K sh
- ICSH 1.67M sh, better
- BAMU $25.30
- ICSH $50.32
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | BAMU | ICSH |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | F0 | A89Higher |
| Mission | A99 | A100Higher |
| Risk | D33 | C53Higher |
| Tradability | F21 | A76Higher |
| Holdings | D28 | A96Higher |
| Durability | C41 | A91Higher |
Rank among Cash & Ultra-Short Income funds
Same Category. BAMU and ICSH are both graded against the same 78 Cash & Ultra-Short Income funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
BAMUD
ICSHA
In short
BAMU Most of the T-bill aisle just holds bills and charges next to nothing. BAMU goes the other way: an active manager steering maturities inside a 0 to 2 year band off its own read on the yield curve, for 1.00% a year.
ICSH BlackRock's active cash-parking sleeve, live since 2013: roughly 250 ultra-short investment-grade bonds and money market instruments, run for current income with preservation of capital, at 0.08% a year.
Stated mandate
BAMU The Fund seeks current income. It is actively managed and invests at least 80% of assets in U.S. Treasuries and investment-grade corporate bonds with maturities from 0 to 2 years, plus related fixed-income ETFs; it does not seek to replicate an index.
ICSH The fund seeks current income consistent with preservation of capital through actively managed exposure to ultra-short-term investment-grade bonds and money market instruments.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
BAMU vs ICSH Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
BAMU vs ICSH Cost
Overpaying BAMU vs ICSH
$16,999
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
BAMU 1.00%
$18,688
ICSH 0.08%
$1,689
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | BAMU | ICSH | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,763 | $147 | $1,616 |
| 20 | $6,625 | $575 | $6,050 |
| 30 | $18,688 | $1,689 | $16,999 |
- 1.00%BAMU
- 0.08%ICSH, cheaper
- Middle half of Cash & Ultra-Short Income funds
- Median 0.18%
ICSH 10th cheapest of 78 funds
BAMU 78th cheapest of 78 funds
BAMU vs ICSH Dividends
- BAMU 2.90%
- ICSH 4.12%, better
- BAMU $0.73
- ICSH $2.07
- BAMU $0.17
- ICSH $0.18
- BAMU Aug 28, 2026
- ICSH Nov 2, 2026
- BAMU Sep 4, 2026
- ICSH Nov 5, 2026
- BAMU Quarterly
- ICSH Monthly
Distribution history
BAMU vs ICSH Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- BAMU 0.3%, betterICSH 0.4%
- Return per unit of risk
- BAMU −5.11ICSH 0.87, better
- Worst fall
- BAMU −0.4%ICSH −0.7%
- Market sensitivity
- BAMU −0.02ICSH 0.04
Popular comparisons
- 1.00% · 0.07%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.00% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.18%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.00% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.