PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBMQ vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBMQ vs. IWM - 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 iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMQ achieves a 0.69% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.


IBMQ

1D
-0.08%
1M
0.16%
YTD
0.69%
6M
1.27%
1Y
3.49%
3Y*
2.96%
5Y*
0.48%
10Y*

IWM

1D
-1.37%
1M
3.52%
YTD
17.07%
6M
15.83%
1Y
39.10%
3Y*
17.88%
5Y*
6.11%
10Y*
10.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBMQ vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IBMQ
iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF
0.69%4.09%0.71%4.00%-6.73%-0.26%6.93%5.39%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
17.07%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%7.59%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMQ and IWM is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.16

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

0.20

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

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2019

0.06

The correlation between IBMQ and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.20 (3 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

IBMQ vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMQ
IBMQ Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
IBMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

IBMQ vs. IWM - 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 iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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.


IBMQIWMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.91

2.05

+0.86

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.41

2.85

+1.56

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.34

+0.27

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.11

3.56

-0.46

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.20

12.64

-4.44

IBMQ vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is higher than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMQ and IWM, 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


IBMQIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.91

2.05

+0.86

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

0.27

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.37

-0.01

Drawdowns

IBMQ vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMQ drawdown since its inception was -15.85%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMQ and IWM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBMQIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.85%

-59.05%

+43.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.13%

-11.03%

+9.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.57%

-27.50%

+23.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.51%

-31.91%

+20.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.33%

-1.49%

+1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.26%

-10.77%

+7.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.43%

3.10%

-2.67%

Volatility

IBMQ vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ) is 0.34%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IBMQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBMQIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.34%

5.75%

-5.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.88%

13.53%

-12.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.21%

19.20%

-17.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.96%

22.52%

-19.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.55%

23.04%

-17.49%

IBMQ vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IBMQ vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IBMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBMQ
iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF
2.45%2.43%2.33%1.93%1.25%1.05%1.24%1.03%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
0.88%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBMQ and IWM have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to IBMQ (0.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMQ dropped -15.85% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.11% vs 0.48% for IBMQ. On fees, IBMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 6.11% return vs 0.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

IBMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.45%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

IBMQ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IBMQ tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2028 Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMQ and 0.19% for IWM.

IBMQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.05), 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 IBMQ and IWM

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