IBMQ vs. SBIL
IBMQ (iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF) and SBIL (Simplify Government Money Market 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 SBIL is a Money Market fund actively managed by Simplify. IBMQ is passively managed, while SBIL is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. IBMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for SBIL.
Performance
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBMQ achieves a 0.69% return, which is significantly lower than SBIL's 1.51% return.
IBMQ
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 0.16%
- YTD
- 0.69%
- 6M
- 1.27%
- 1Y
- 3.49%
- 3Y*
- 2.96%
- 5Y*
- 0.48%
- 10Y*
- —
SBIL
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 1.80%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.69% | 1.72% |
SBIL Simplify Government Money Market ETF | 1.51% | 1.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBMQ and SBIL is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2025 | -0.11 |
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. SBIL — Risk / Return Rank
IBMQ
SBIL
IBMQ vs. SBIL - 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 Simplify Government Money Market ETF (SBIL). 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.
| IBMQ | SBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.61 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.11 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.20 | — | — |
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
| IBMQ | SBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.91 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 14.09 | -13.73 |
Drawdowns
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBMQ drawdown since its inception was -15.85%, which is greater than SBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMQ and SBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBMQ | SBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.85% | -0.03% | -15.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.13% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.57% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.51% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.33% | 0.00% | -0.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.26% | -0.00% | -3.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.43% | — | — |
Volatility
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBMQ | SBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.34% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.88% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.21% | 0.28% | +0.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.96% | 0.28% | +2.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.55% | 0.28% | +5.27% |
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than SBIL's 0.15% 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
IBMQ vs. SBIL - Dividend Comparison
IBMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, less than SBIL's 3.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SBIL Simplify Government Money Market ETF | 3.26% | 1.79% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBMQ and SBIL have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SBIL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SBIL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMQ.
SBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.26%, compared with 2.45% for IBMQ.
IBMQ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while SBIL is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMQ and 0.15% for SBIL.
Find the right allocation for IBMQ and SBIL
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