IBMO vs. IHF
IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) and IHF (iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMO is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2026 Index, while IHF is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Healthcare Providers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBMO returned 0.62%/yr vs 1.74%/yr for IHF. Their 0.00 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IBMO charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for IHF.
Performance
IBMO vs. IHF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBMO achieves a 1.22% return, which is significantly lower than IHF's 19.07% return.
IBMO
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.16%
- 6M
- 1.09%
- YTD
- 1.22%
- 1Y
- 2.34%
- 3Y*
- 3.01%
- 5Y*
- 0.62%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 1.84%
IHF
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -1.13%
- 6M
- 25.51%
- YTD
- 19.07%
- 1Y
- 40.84%
- 3Y*
- 4.01%
- 5Y*
- 1.74%
- 10Y*
- 9.45%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.87%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.89M | $1.94M | $1.71M | |
| $31.65M | $27.11M | $26.74M |
IBMO vs. IHF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 1.22% | 3.11% | 1.97% | 2.90% | -5.36% | -0.16% | 5.48% | 4.69% |
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | 19.07% | 0.92% | -7.90% | -1.11% | -7.11% | 24.46% | 17.67% | 20.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBMO and IHF is -0.10, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2019 | 0.00 |
The correlation between IBMO and IHF shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.05 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
IBMO vs. IHF — Risk / Return Rank
IBMO
IHF
IBMO vs. IHF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) and iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF). 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.
| IBMO | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.38 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.22 | 2.08 | +4.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.35 | 5.71 | +12.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBMO vs. IHF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBMO drawdown since its inception was -14.77%, smaller than the maximum IHF drawdown of -58.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMO and IHF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBMO | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.77% | -58.42% | +43.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.38% | -19.72% | +19.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.21% | -29.85% | +28.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.77% | -29.85% | +21.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | -2.17% | +2.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.27% | -10.59% | +8.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.13% | 7.18% | -7.05% |
Volatility
IBMO vs. IHF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) is 0.36%, while iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) has a volatility of 4.90%. This indicates that IBMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBMO | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.36% | 4.90% | -4.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.72% | 12.94% | -12.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.14% | 20.35% | -19.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.14% | 19.30% | -17.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.47% | 21.04% | -16.57% |
IBMO vs. IHF - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBMO has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than IHF's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBMO vs. IHF - Dividend Comparison
IBMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than IHF's 0.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.40% | 2.37% | 2.15% | 1.65% | 0.89% | 0.62% | 1.03% | 1.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | 0.92% | 1.05% | 0.86% | 0.79% | 0.74% | 0.56% | 0.53% | 0.58% | 4.01% | 0.19% | 0.25% | 0.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBMO and IHF have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IHF has higher volatility (4.90%) compared to IBMO (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMO dropped -14.77% vs IHF's -58.42%.
On 5-year performance, IHF leads with 1.74% vs 0.62% for IBMO. On fees, IBMO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMO has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IHF has performed better with a 1.74% return vs 0.62%. 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 0.38% for IHF.
IBMO has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.92% for IHF.
IBMO is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while IHF is Health & Biotech Equities. IBMO tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2026 Index, while IHF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Healthcare Providers Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMO and 0.38% for IHF.
IBMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 2.02), 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 IBMO and IHF
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