IBMP vs. CA
IBMP (iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF) and CA (Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - IBMP tracks the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Callable Factor Adjusted 2027 Series Index while CA tracks the ICE AMT-Free Broad Liquid California Municipal Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBMP returned 3.04% vs 6.67% for CA. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMP charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CA.
Performance
IBMP vs. CA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBMP achieves a 0.89% return, which is significantly lower than CA's 1.20% return.
IBMP
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 0.89%
- 6M
- 1.26%
- 1Y
- 3.04%
- 3Y*
- 2.97%
- 5Y*
- 0.59%
- 10Y*
- —
CA
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.20%
- 6M
- 1.44%
- 1Y
- 6.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMP vs. CA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
IBMP iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.89% | 3.52% | 1.26% | 0.30% |
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF | 1.20% | 3.05% | 1.51% | 0.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBMP and CA is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2023 | 0.46 |
The correlation between IBMP and CA shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), 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
IBMP vs. CA — Risk / Return Rank
IBMP
CA
IBMP vs. CA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMP) and Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA). 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.
| IBMP | CA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.58 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.14 | 2.61 | +2.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.24 | 9.84 | +4.40 |
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
| IBMP | CA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.83 | 2.54 | +0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.67 | -0.29 |
Drawdowns
IBMP vs. CA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBMP drawdown since its inception was -15.24%, which is greater than CA's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMP and CA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBMP | CA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.24% | -5.24% | -10.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.59% | -2.57% | +1.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.63% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.00% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.01% | -0.75% | +0.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.72% | -1.27% | -1.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.21% | 0.68% | -0.47% |
Volatility
IBMP vs. CA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMP) is 0.27%, while Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA) has a volatility of 0.31%. This indicates that IBMP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBMP | CA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.27% | 0.31% | -0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.79% | 1.83% | -1.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.08% | 2.64% | -1.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.56% | 3.99% | -1.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.01% | 3.99% | +1.02% |
IBMP vs. CA - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBMP has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than CA's 0.07% 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
IBMP vs. CA - Dividend Comparison
IBMP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, less than CA's 2.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CA Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF | 2.96% | 3.14% | 3.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBMP iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.50% | 2.47% | 2.35% | 2.05% | 1.26% | 0.86% | 1.16% | 1.06% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBMP and CA have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CA has higher volatility (0.31%) compared to IBMP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMP dropped -15.24% vs CA's -5.24%.
On 1-year performance, CA leads with 6.67% vs 3.04% for IBMP. On fees, CA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CA has performed better with a 6.67% return vs 3.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMP.
CA has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 2.50% for IBMP.
IBMP tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Callable Factor Adjusted 2027 Series Index, while CA tracks ICE AMT-Free Broad Liquid California Municipal Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMP and 0.07% for CA.
IBMP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 2.54), 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 IBMP and CA
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