IBMQ vs. FBDC

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IBMQ (iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF) and FBDC (FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMQ is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2028 Index, while FBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. IBMQ is passively managed, while FBDC is actively managed. Over the past year, IBMQ returned 2.85% vs -12.75% for FBDC. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for FBDC.

Performance

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMQ achieves a 1.08% return, which is significantly higher than FBDC's -7.16% return.

IBMQ

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 0.23%
• 6M: 0.78%
• YTD: 1.08%
• 1Y: 2.85%
• 3Y*: 2.85%
• 5Y*: 0.43%
• 10Y*: —

FBDC

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: -7.47%
• YTD: -7.16%
• 1Y: -12.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF	1.08%	2.13%
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	-7.16%	-2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMQ and FBDC 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2025	0.14

Return for Risk

IBMQ vs. FBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMQ

IBMQ Risk / Return Rank: 78
IBMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
IBMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
IBMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 92
IBMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
IBMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 50

FBDC

FBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
FBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
FBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). 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.

	IBMQ	FBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	-0.71	+3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	-0.93	+4.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	0.90	+0.59
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.54	-0.62	+3.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.68	-1.05	+7.73

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is higher than the FBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMQ and FBDC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMQ drawdown since its inception was -15.85%, smaller than the maximum FBDC drawdown of -20.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMQ and FBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMQ	FBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.85%	-20.60%	+4.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.13%	-20.60%	+19.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.08%	-15.10%	+15.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.21%	-10.71%	+7.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.43%	12.14%	-11.71%

Volatility

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ) is 0.25%, while FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC) has a volatility of 4.14%. This indicates that IBMQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMQ	FBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.25%	4.14%	-3.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.86%	14.46%	-13.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.19%	17.98%	-16.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.95%	17.85%	-14.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.51%	17.85%	-12.34%

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FBDC's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMQ vs. FBDC - Dividend Comparison

IBMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, less than FBDC's 12.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	12.38%	5.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF	2.44%	2.43%	2.33%	1.93%	1.25%	1.05%	1.24%	1.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMQ and FBDC in my portfolio?

IBMQ and FBDC 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.

Which is riskier, IBMQ or FBDC?

FBDC has higher volatility (4.14%) compared to IBMQ (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMQ dropped -15.85% vs FBDC's -20.60%.

Which ETF is better, IBMQ or FBDC?

On 1-year performance, IBMQ leads with 2.85% vs -12.75% for FBDC. On fees, IBMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMQ or FBDC?

Over the 1-year period, IBMQ has performed better with a 2.85% return vs -12.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMQ or FBDC?

IBMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for FBDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBMQ or FBDC?

FBDC has the higher dividend yield at 12.38%, compared with 2.44% for IBMQ.

What is the main difference between IBMQ and FBDC?

IBMQ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FBDC is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMQ and 1.35% for FBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs -0.71), 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.