IBMO vs. RMCA

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) and RMCA (Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. IBMO is passively managed, while RMCA is actively managed. Over the past year, IBMO returned 2.78% vs 7.23% for RMCA. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMO charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for RMCA.

Performance

IBMO vs. RMCA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) and Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMO achieves a 0.95% return, which is significantly lower than RMCA's 2.49% return.

IBMO

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.17%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 1.30%
• 1Y: 2.78%
• 3Y*: 2.93%
• 5Y*: 0.67%
• 10Y*: —

RMCA

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 2.49%
• 6M: 2.89%
• 1Y: 7.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBMO vs. RMCA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.95%	3.11%	0.73%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	2.49%	2.35%	-0.14%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMO and RMCA is 0.10, 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	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2024	0.25

The correlation between IBMO and RMCA shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IBMO vs. RMCA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMO

IBMO Risk / Return Rank: 88
IBMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
IBMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
IBMO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
IBMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
IBMO Martin Ratio Rank: 91

RMCA

RMCA Risk / Return Rank: 63
RMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
RMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
RMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

IBMO vs. RMCA - 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 Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA). 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.

	IBMO	RMCA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.54	1.94	+0.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.08	2.90	+1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.41	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.38	3.09	+4.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.93	10.25	+11.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBMO vs. RMCA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMO Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is higher than the RMCA Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMO and RMCA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBMO	RMCA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.54	1.94	+0.60
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.49	-0.08

Drawdowns

IBMO vs. RMCA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMO drawdown since its inception was -14.77%, which is greater than RMCA's maximum drawdown of -5.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMO and RMCA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMO	RMCA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.77%	-5.95%	-8.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.38%	-2.35%	+1.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-8.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.04%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.32%	-1.63%	-0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.13%	0.71%	-0.58%

Volatility

IBMO vs. RMCA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) is 0.19%, while Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) has a volatility of 1.15%. This indicates that IBMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RMCA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMO	RMCA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.19%	1.15%	-0.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.83%	2.49%	-1.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.10%	3.76%	-2.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.15%	5.38%	-3.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.52%	5.38%	-0.86%

IBMO vs. RMCA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMO has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than RMCA's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMO vs. RMCA - Dividend Comparison

IBMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.39%, less than RMCA's 4.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
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%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	4.35%	4.51%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMO and RMCA in my portfolio?

IBMO and RMCA 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.

Which is riskier, IBMO or RMCA?

RMCA has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to IBMO (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMO dropped -14.77% vs RMCA's -5.95%.

Which ETF is better, IBMO or RMCA?

On 1-year performance, RMCA leads with 7.23% vs 2.78% for IBMO. On fees, IBMO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMO has been the lower-risk option at 0.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMO or RMCA?

Over the 1-year period, RMCA has performed better with a 7.23% return vs 2.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMO or RMCA?

IBMO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for RMCA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBMO or RMCA?

RMCA has the higher dividend yield at 4.35%, compared with 2.39% for IBMO.

What is the main difference between IBMO and RMCA?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Rockefeller. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMO and 0.55% for RMCA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 1.94), 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.