IBMQ vs. SLJY

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IBMQ (iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF) and SLJY (Amplify SILJ Covered Call 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 SLJY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Amplify. IBMQ is passively managed, while SLJY is actively managed. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for SLJY.

Performance

IBMQ vs. SLJY - 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 Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF (SLJY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMQ achieves a 0.93% return, which is significantly higher than SLJY's -4.62% return.

IBMQ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 0.93%
• 6M: 1.12%
• 1Y: 3.24%
• 3Y*: 2.84%
• 5Y*: 0.55%
• 10Y*: —

SLJY

• 1D: -4.03%
• 1M: -10.47%
• YTD: -4.62%
• 6M: -7.86%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBMQ vs. SLJY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.93%	0.91%
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF	-4.62%	42.11%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMQ and SLJY is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2025	0.08

Return for Risk

IBMQ vs. SLJY — 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: 93
IBMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 92
IBMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
IBMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

SLJY

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. SLJY - 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 Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF (SLJY). 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	SLJY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.13	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.89	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.58	—	—

Drawdowns

IBMQ vs. SLJY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMQ drawdown since its inception was -15.85%, smaller than the maximum SLJY drawdown of -32.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMQ and SLJY.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMQ	SLJY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.85%	-32.40%	+16.55%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-30.62%	+30.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.23%	-10.64%	+7.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.43%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBMQ	SLJY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.26%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.87%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.19%	50.39%	-49.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.95%	50.39%	-47.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.53%	50.39%	-44.86%

IBMQ vs. SLJY - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than SLJY's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMQ vs. SLJY - Dividend Comparison

IBMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, less than SLJY's 18.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
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%
SLJY Amplify SILJ Covered Call ETF	18.88%	6.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMQ and SLJY in my portfolio?

IBMQ and SLJY have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBMQ or SLJY?

On fees, IBMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMQ or SLJY?

IBMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for SLJY.

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

SLJY has the higher dividend yield at 18.88%, compared with 2.44% for IBMQ.

What is the main difference between IBMQ and SLJY?

IBMQ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while SLJY is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMQ and 0.75% for SLJY.