IBMR vs. PLTG

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IBMR (iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF) and PLTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMR is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted 2029 Index, while PLTG is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Leverage Shares. IBMR is passively managed, while PLTG is actively managed. Over the past year, IBMR returned 2.90% vs -44.91% for PLTG. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. IBMR charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PLTG.

Performance

IBMR vs. PLTG - 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 Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF (PLTG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMR achieves a 0.84% return, which is significantly higher than PLTG's -57.85% return.

IBMR

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 0.13%
• 6M: 0.35%
• YTD: 0.84%
• 1Y: 2.90%
• 3Y*: 3.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PLTG

• 1D: 5.15%
• 1M: -0.63%
• 6M: -58.24%
• YTD: -57.85%
• 1Y: -44.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBMR vs. PLTG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IBMR iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.84%	4.50%
PLTG Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF	-57.85%	100.70%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMR and PLTG is -0.05, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2025	-0.07

Return for Risk

IBMR vs. PLTG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMR

IBMR Risk / Return Rank: 58
IBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
IBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
IBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 74
IBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
IBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 38

PLTG

PLTG Risk / Return Rank: 6
PLTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
PLTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
PLTG Omega Ratio Rank: 7
PLTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
PLTG Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. PLTG - 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 Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF (PLTG). 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.

	IBMR	PLTG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	-0.44	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	-0.07	+2.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	0.99	+0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.88	-0.56	+2.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.74	-0.97	+5.71

IBMR vs. PLTG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMR Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is higher than the PLTG Sharpe Ratio of -0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMR and PLTG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IBMR vs. PLTG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMR drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum PLTG drawdown of -80.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMR and PLTG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMR	PLTG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.83%	-80.11%	+75.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.55%	-80.11%	+78.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-71.36%	+70.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.00%	-33.81%	+32.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.61%	46.24%	-45.63%

Volatility

IBMR vs. PLTG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMR) is 0.27%, while Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF (PLTG) has a volatility of 32.97%. This indicates that IBMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PLTG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMR	PLTG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.27%	32.97%	-32.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.09%	80.15%	-79.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75%	103.32%	-101.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.02%	106.10%	-103.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.02%	106.10%	-103.08%

IBMR vs. PLTG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMR has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than PLTG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMR vs. PLTG - Dividend Comparison

IBMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, less than PLTG's 43.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
IBMR iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Muni Bond ETF	2.54%	2.55%	2.53%	1.27%
PLTG Leverage Shares 2X Long PLTR Daily ETF	43.04%	18.14%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMR and PLTG in my portfolio?

IBMR and PLTG have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBMR or PLTG?

PLTG has higher volatility (32.97%) compared to IBMR (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMR dropped -4.83% vs PLTG's -80.11%.

Which ETF is better, IBMR or PLTG?

On 1-year performance, IBMR leads with 2.90% vs -44.91% for PLTG. On fees, IBMR is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMR or PLTG?

Over the 1-year period, IBMR has performed better with a 2.90% return vs -44.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMR or PLTG?

IBMR is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PLTG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBMR or PLTG?

PLTG has the higher dividend yield at 43.04%, compared with 2.54% for IBMR.

What is the main difference between IBMR and PLTG?

IBMR is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while PLTG is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMR and 0.75% for PLTG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs -0.44), 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.