IBMQ vs. SMMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBMQ (iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF) and SMMU (PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. IBMQ is passively managed, while SMMU is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBMQ returned 0.48%/yr vs 1.90%/yr for SMMU. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMMU.

Performance

IBMQ vs. SMMU - 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 PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMQ achieves a 0.69% return, which is significantly lower than SMMU's 1.10% return.

IBMQ

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

SMMU

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 1.10%
• 6M: 1.36%
• 1Y: 3.92%
• 3Y*: 3.67%
• 5Y*: 1.90%
• 10Y*: 1.82%

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

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
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%
SMMU PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF	1.10%	4.06%	2.68%	4.39%	-2.45%	0.17%	2.87%	2.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMQ and SMMU is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2019	0.48

The correlation between IBMQ and SMMU shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.54 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IBMQ vs. SMMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMQ

IBMQ Risk / Return Rank: 77
IBMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
IBMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
IBMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 91
IBMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
IBMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

SMMU

SMMU Risk / Return Rank: 92
SMMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
SMMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
SMMU Omega Ratio Rank: 97
SMMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
SMMU Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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. SMMU - 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 PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU). 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	SMMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.91	3.84	-0.92
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.41	5.82	-1.41
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.90	-0.30
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	5.10	-2.00
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.20	18.24	-10.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the SMMU Sharpe Ratio of 3.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMQ and SMMU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBMQ	SMMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.91	3.84	-0.92
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16	1.14	-0.98
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.67	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	0.60	-0.24

Drawdowns

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMQ drawdown since its inception was -15.85%, which is greater than SMMU's maximum drawdown of -5.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMQ and SMMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMQ	SMMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.85%	-5.09%	-10.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.13%	-0.77%	-0.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.57%	-1.95%	-1.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.51%	-4.76%	-6.75%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-5.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-0.03%	-0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-0.55%	-2.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.43%	0.22%	+0.21%

Volatility

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ) has a higher volatility of 0.34% compared to PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU) at 0.31%. This indicates that IBMQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMQ	SMMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.34%	0.31%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.88%	0.79%	+0.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.21%	1.02%	+0.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.96%	1.67%	+1.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.55%	2.73%	+2.82%

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than SMMU's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMQ vs. SMMU - Dividend Comparison

IBMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, less than SMMU's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
SMMU PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF	2.84%	2.80%	3.03%	2.79%	1.37%	0.60%	1.19%	1.82%	1.57%	1.41%	1.03%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMQ and SMMU in my portfolio?

IBMQ and SMMU have a correlation of 0.37, 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 SMMU?

IBMQ has higher volatility (0.34%) compared to SMMU (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMQ dropped -15.85% vs SMMU's -5.09%.

Which ETF is better, IBMQ or SMMU?

On 5-year performance, SMMU leads with 1.90% vs 0.48% for IBMQ. On fees, IBMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMQ or SMMU?

Over the 5-year period, SMMU has performed better with a 1.90% return vs 0.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMQ or SMMU?

IBMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for SMMU.

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

SMMU has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 2.45% for IBMQ.

What is the main difference between IBMQ and SMMU?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMQ and 0.35% for SMMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.84 vs 2.91), 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.