Municipal Bonds and Historical Calendar Year Returns
Municipal Bonds Total Returns, 1991-2016
Bloomberg Barclays and its Municipal Bond Index is the industry benchmark for tracking municipal bond returns. The results for the past 25 years are shown in the Bloomberg Barclays Municipal Bond Index table below.
As a point for comparison, the returns of the Bloomberg Barclays Aggregate Index—a measure of U.S. investment-grade bond market performance—are also shown alongside the muni bond returns to provide a sense of how municipal bonds performed compared to the broader fixed-income market. Municipal bonds outperformed in 14 of the 26 calendar years.
|Year||Municipal Bonds||Barclays Agg.|
Municipal Bond Interest-Rate Risk
With respect to interest-rate risk, it’s evident that municipals generally track the performance of the broader market. In the three calendar years in which the Barclays Aggregate Index lost ground (1994, 1999, and 2013), rates rose in the two of three, and municipals finished with a negative return in all three. On the other side of the ledger, munis delivered a positive return in 22 of the 23 years in which the bond market finished the year in positive or neutral territory.
Municipal Bond Credit Risk
Credit risk also plays a role in the returns of municipal bonds. Credit risk is the risk that a bond will default, and it incorporates broader factors that cause the outlook for defaults to shift. For instance, an economic downturn raises the risk of defaults, which affects bonds whose performance incorporates an aspect of credit risk. Since municipal bonds are offered by such a wide range of issuers, from states and large cities to small towns and specific entities (such as airports and sewer districts), credit risk can also impact performance.
This is visible in the results posted in 2008, when rates fell and the bond market gained over 5%, but municipal bonds lost ground. This reflects a year characterized not just by recession and heightened investor risk aversion, but also by the housing market collapse. In turn, this led to a sharp decline in tax revenues for municipal entities, fueling concerns about the potential increase in the default rate.
Similarly, municipals underperformed in years characterized by big financial news headlines: 1994 (the Orange Country, CA bankruptcy), 2010 (Meredith Whitney’s prediction of a “wave of defaults”), and 2013 (Detroit’s bankruptcy and Puerto Rico’s financial troubles). The impact of these events also helps underscore the fact that there’s more to municipal bonds’ performance than simply the direction of interest rates.
Over the longer-term, however, the returns of municipal bonds have been fairly close to those of the investment-grade market. Keep in mind, however, that this isn't an apples-to-apples comparison since the interest on municipal bonds is tax-free. As a result, the after-tax total return of municipals is actually closer to that of investment-grade bonds than it appears at first glance.
The Bottom Line
It's often stated that bonds provide the lower-risk returns appropriate for conservative investors and those nearing or already in retirement. But the table above, with its almost 20-point difference between the best year's returns and the worst, also shows that bonds are by no means risk-free. They are less volatile than stocks, but still volatile nonetheless. And, as with stocks, it matters a great deal when you begin investing.
Bond returns in the early 1980s were extraordinarily high because compounding gave bond investors a head start that investors investing later were unlikely ever to match. Similarly, bond investors who began investing in the post-financial-meltdown area that began in 2007 have suffered nearly a decade of extremely low returns. Even the eventual return to high interest rates is unlikely to make up for this discouraging start.