AMUN vs. IBMN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AMUN (abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF) and IBMN (iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. AMUN is actively managed, while IBMN is passively managed. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMUN charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMN.

Performance

AMUN vs. IBMN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

AMUN

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.32%
• YTD: 1.11%
• 6M: 1.36%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBMN

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 0.00%
• 6M: 0.00%
• 1Y: 1.20%
• 3Y*: 2.44%
• 5Y*: 0.47%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMUN vs. IBMN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF	1.11%	0.14%
IBMN iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.00%	0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between AMUN and IBMN is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2025	0.05

Return for Risk

AMUN vs. IBMN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IBMN

IBMN Risk / Return Rank: 84
IBMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
IBMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
IBMN Omega Ratio Rank: 93
IBMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IBMN Martin Ratio Rank: 93

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AMUN vs. IBMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF (AMUN) and iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AMUN	IBMN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.12	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.05	0.58	+1.46

Drawdowns

AMUN vs. IBMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMUN drawdown since its inception was -0.61%, smaller than the maximum IBMN drawdown of -12.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUN and IBMN.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMUN	IBMN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-12.40%	+11.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.25%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.10%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-7.36%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-0.05%	+0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-1.81%	+1.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.10%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AMUN	IBMN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.00%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.50%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.01%	0.71%	+0.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.01%	1.80%	-0.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.01%	3.89%	-2.88%

AMUN vs. IBMN - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMUN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMN's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AMUN vs. IBMN - Dividend Comparison

AMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, more than IBMN's 1.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AMUN abrdn Ultra Short Municipal Income Active ETF	1.89%	0.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBMN iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF	1.14%	2.03%	2.03%	1.72%	0.97%	0.70%	1.11%	1.65%	0.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMUN and IBMN in my portfolio?

AMUN and IBMN have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AMUN or IBMN?

On fees, IBMN is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMUN or IBMN?

IBMN is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMUN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMUN or IBMN?

AMUN has the higher dividend yield at 1.89%, compared with 1.14% for IBMN.

What is the main difference between AMUN and IBMN?

They also come from different issuers: abrdn and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMUN and 0.18% for IBMN.