IBMN vs. TOAK
IBMN (iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF) and TOAK (Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMN is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2025 Index, while TOAK is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Twin Oak. IBMN is passively managed, while TOAK is actively managed. Over the past year, IBMN returned 1.20% vs 3.70% for TOAK. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. IBMN charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for TOAK.
Performance
IBMN vs. TOAK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IBMN
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.00%
- 1Y
- 1.20%
- 3Y*
- 2.44%
- 5Y*
- 0.47%
- 10Y*
- —
TOAK
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.24%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- 1Y
- 3.70%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMN vs. TOAK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IBMN iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.00% | 2.49% | 0.84% |
TOAK Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF | 1.32% | 4.28% | 1.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBMN and TOAK is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024 | -0.08 |
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
IBMN vs. TOAK — Risk / Return Rank
IBMN
TOAK
IBMN vs. TOAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN) and Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF (TOAK). 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.
| IBMN | TOAK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.66 | 1.77 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.02 | 2.05 | +3.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.21 | 8.11 | +16.10 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBMN | TOAK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 1.27 | +0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 1.82 | -1.23 |
Drawdowns
IBMN vs. TOAK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBMN drawdown since its inception was -12.40%, which is greater than TOAK's maximum drawdown of -1.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMN and TOAK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBMN | TOAK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.40% | -1.81% | -10.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.25% | -1.81% | +1.56% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.10% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -7.36% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.05% | -1.72% | +1.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.81% | -0.10% | -1.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.10% | 0.46% | -0.36% |
Volatility
IBMN vs. TOAK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN) is 0.00%, while Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF (TOAK) has a volatility of 2.72%. This indicates that IBMN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TOAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBMN | TOAK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 2.72% | -2.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.50% | 2.89% | -2.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.71% | 2.92% | -2.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.80% | 2.22% | -0.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.89% | 2.22% | +1.67% |
IBMN vs. TOAK - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBMN has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than TOAK's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IBMN vs. TOAK - Dividend Comparison
IBMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, while TOAK has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
TOAK Twin Oak Short Horizon Absolute Return ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBMN and TOAK have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TOAK has higher volatility (2.72%) compared to IBMN (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMN dropped -12.40% vs TOAK's -1.81%.
On 1-year performance, TOAK leads with 3.70% vs 1.20% for IBMN. On fees, IBMN is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMN has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TOAK has performed better with a 3.70% return vs 1.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBMN is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for TOAK.
IBMN has the higher dividend yield at 1.14%, compared with 0.00% for TOAK.
IBMN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while TOAK is Multistrategy. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Twin Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMN and 0.25% for TOAK.
IBMN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.27), 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 IBMN and TOAK
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