PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBMR vs. CMDY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBMR vs. CMDY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMR) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMR achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than CMDY's 24.16% return.


IBMR

1D
0.08%
1M
0.29%
YTD
0.73%
6M
1.13%
1Y
3.88%
3Y*
3.43%
5Y*
10Y*

CMDY

1D
-1.01%
1M
-3.07%
YTD
24.16%
6M
23.07%
1Y
35.71%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.49%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBMR vs. CMDY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IBMR
iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF
0.73%4.45%0.06%3.46%
CMDY
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF
24.16%15.81%5.43%-0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMR and CMDY is -0.19, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

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

-0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023

-0.01

The correlation between IBMR and CMDY shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.01 (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

IBMR vs. CMDY — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMR
IBMR Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
IBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

CMDY
CMDY Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
CMDY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMDY Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMDY Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
CMDY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMDY Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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.

IBMR vs. CMDY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMR) and iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY). 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.


IBMRCMDYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.40

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.51

4.64

-2.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.65

13.86

-7.20

IBMR vs. CMDY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMR Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the CMDY Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMR and CMDY, 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


IBMRCMDYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.23

2.23

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.93

0.55

+0.38

Drawdowns

IBMR vs. CMDY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMR drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum CMDY drawdown of -31.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMR and CMDY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBMRCMDYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.83%

-31.19%

+26.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.55%

-7.73%

+6.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.72%

-10.08%

+5.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.66%

-4.95%

+4.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.02%

-13.14%

+12.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.59%

2.58%

-1.99%

Volatility

IBMR vs. CMDY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMR) is 0.45%, while iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF (CMDY) has a volatility of 5.11%. This indicates that IBMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBMRCMDYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.45%

5.11%

-4.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.14%

14.25%

-13.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75%

16.10%

-14.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.07%

15.80%

-12.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.07%

14.63%

-11.56%

IBMR vs. CMDY - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMR has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CMDY's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

IBMR vs. CMDY - Dividend Comparison

IBMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.55%, less than CMDY's 10.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
CMDY
iShares Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Strategy ETF
10.38%12.89%4.23%5.10%3.98%16.09%0.15%2.21%1.73%
IBMR
iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF
2.55%2.55%2.53%1.27%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBMR and CMDY have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CMDY has higher volatility (5.11%) compared to IBMR (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMR dropped -4.83% vs CMDY's -31.19%.

On 3-year performance, CMDY leads with 15.11% vs 3.43% for IBMR. On fees, IBMR is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, CMDY has performed better with a 15.11% return vs 3.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBMR is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for CMDY.

CMDY has the higher dividend yield at 10.38%, compared with 2.55% for IBMR.

IBMR is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while CMDY is Commodities. IBMR tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted 2029 Index, while CMDY tracks Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMR and 0.28% for CMDY.

CMDY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 2.23), 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 IBMR and CMDY

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