FLMI vs. IBMO
FLMI (Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF) and IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. FLMI is actively managed, while IBMO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLMI returned 2.17%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for IBMO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLMI charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMO.
Performance
FLMI vs. IBMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLMI achieves a 2.47% return, which is significantly higher than IBMO's 1.03% return.
FLMI
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- 2.47%
- 6M
- 2.68%
- 1Y
- 7.87%
- 3Y*
- 5.72%
- 5Y*
- 2.17%
- 10Y*
- —
IBMO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.19%
- YTD
- 1.03%
- 6M
- 1.02%
- 1Y
- 2.62%
- 3Y*
- 2.80%
- 5Y*
- 0.72%
- 10Y*
- —
FLMI vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLMI Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF | 2.47% | 5.89% | 4.91% | 7.89% | -10.23% | 4.06% | 6.11% | 3.96% |
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 1.03% | 3.11% | 1.97% | 2.90% | -5.36% | -0.16% | 5.48% | 4.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLMI and IBMO 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2019 | 0.47 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FLMI and IBMO has dropped to 0.05 - well below their long-term average of 0.47, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FLMI vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank
FLMI
IBMO
FLMI vs. IBMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF (FLMI) and iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| FLMI | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.61 | 1.49 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | 6.95 | -4.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.81 | 20.64 | -10.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLMI vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLMI drawdown since its inception was -14.66%, roughly equal to the maximum IBMO drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLMI and IBMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLMI | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.66% | -14.77% | +0.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.90% | -0.38% | -2.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.31% | -1.76% | -3.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.66% | -8.86% | -5.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | 0.00% | -0.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.81% | -2.31% | -0.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.80% | 0.13% | +0.67% |
Volatility
FLMI vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF (FLMI) has a higher volatility of 0.67% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) at 0.22%. This indicates that FLMI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLMI | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.67% | 0.22% | +0.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.06% | 0.79% | +1.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.93% | 1.10% | +1.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.43% | 2.14% | +2.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.71% | 4.50% | +0.21% |
FLMI vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLMI has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMO's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLMI vs. IBMO - Dividend Comparison
FLMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.87%, more than IBMO's 2.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLMI Franklin Liberty Federal Intermediate Tax-Free Bond Opportunities ETF | 3.87% | 3.89% | 4.08% | 3.71% | 3.08% | 2.22% | 2.09% | 2.71% | 2.41% | 0.34% |
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.39% | 2.37% | 2.15% | 1.65% | 0.89% | 0.62% | 1.03% | 1.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLMI and IBMO 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.
FLMI has higher volatility (0.67%) compared to IBMO (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLMI dropped -14.66% vs IBMO's -14.77%.
On 5-year performance, FLMI leads with 2.17% vs 0.72% for IBMO. On fees, IBMO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMO has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLMI has performed better with a 2.17% return vs 0.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBMO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for FLMI.
FLMI has the higher dividend yield at 3.87%, compared with 2.39% for IBMO.
They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for FLMI and 0.18% for IBMO.
FLMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.39), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for FLMI and IBMO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer