PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBMP vs. MFLX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBMP vs. MFLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMP) and First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF (MFLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMP achieves a 0.89% return, which is significantly lower than MFLX's 3.33% return.


IBMP

1D
0.00%
1M
0.21%
YTD
0.89%
6M
1.26%
1Y
3.04%
3Y*
2.97%
5Y*
0.59%
10Y*

MFLX

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.21%
YTD
3.33%
6M
3.84%
1Y
9.22%
3Y*
5.48%
5Y*
-0.03%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBMP vs. MFLX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IBMP
iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF
0.89%3.52%1.26%3.49%-6.09%-0.16%6.22%4.88%
MFLX
First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF
3.33%3.94%3.74%8.98%-19.94%8.43%7.19%7.72%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMP and MFLX is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.13

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.26

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2019

0.28

The correlation between IBMP and MFLX shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (1 year) to 0.29 (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

IBMP vs. MFLX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMP
IBMP Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
IBMP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMP Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMP Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

MFLX
MFLX Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
MFLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFLX Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
MFLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFLX Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IBMP vs. MFLX - 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 First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF (MFLX). 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.


IBMPMFLXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.49

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.14

2.97

+2.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.24

11.95

+2.29

IBMP vs. MFLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMP Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is comparable to the MFLX Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMP and MFLX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IBMPMFLXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.83

2.27

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

-0.00

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.19

+0.19

Drawdowns

IBMP vs. MFLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMP drawdown since its inception was -15.24%, smaller than the maximum MFLX drawdown of -26.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMP and MFLX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBMPMFLXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.24%

-26.76%

+11.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.59%

-3.11%

+2.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.63%

-8.18%

+5.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.00%

-25.88%

+15.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

-3.78%

+3.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.72%

-8.17%

+5.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.21%

0.77%

-0.56%

Volatility

IBMP vs. MFLX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMP) is 0.27%, while First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF (MFLX) has a volatility of 1.41%. This indicates that IBMP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MFLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBMPMFLXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.27%

1.41%

-1.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.79%

2.98%

-2.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.08%

4.08%

-3.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.56%

10.36%

-7.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.01%

11.29%

-6.28%

IBMP vs. MFLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMP has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MFLX's 0.88% expense ratio.


Dividends

IBMP vs. MFLX - Dividend Comparison

IBMP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, less than MFLX's 4.08% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
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%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MFLX
First Trust Flexible Municipal High Income ETF
4.08%4.06%3.81%3.65%4.27%3.69%3.21%2.94%3.74%3.80%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBMP and MFLX have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MFLX has higher volatility (1.41%) compared to IBMP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMP dropped -15.24% vs MFLX's -26.76%.

On 5-year performance, IBMP leads with 0.59% vs -0.03% for MFLX. On fees, IBMP is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMP has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IBMP has performed better with a 0.59% return vs -0.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBMP is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for MFLX.

MFLX has the higher dividend yield at 4.08%, compared with 2.50% for IBMP.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMP and 0.88% for MFLX.

IBMP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 2.27), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IBMP and MFLX

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