IBMS vs. IAU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBMS (iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF) and IAU (iShares Gold Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMS is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2030 Index, while IAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBMS returned 4.50% vs 32.20% for IAU. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBMS charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IAU.

Performance

IBMS vs. IAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMS) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMS achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly lower than IAU's 2.98% return.

IBMS

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 0.35%
• 6M: 0.87%
• 1Y: 4.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IAU

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: -1.62%
• YTD: 2.98%
• 6M: 5.50%
• 1Y: 32.20%
• 3Y*: 31.29%
• 5Y*: 18.32%
• 10Y*: 13.31%

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

IBMS vs. IAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBMS iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.35%	5.36%	3.03%
IAU iShares Gold Trust	2.98%	63.95%	12.22%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMS and IAU is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2024	0.11

Return for Risk

IBMS vs. IAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMS

IBMS Risk / Return Rank: 60
IBMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
IBMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
IBMS Omega Ratio Rank: 82
IBMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
IBMS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

IAU

IAU Risk / Return Rank: 32
IAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
IAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
IAU Omega Ratio Rank: 36
IAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
IAU Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

IBMS vs. IAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMS) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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.

	IBMS	IAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	1.23	+1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.30	1.62	+1.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.24	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.00	1.69	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.41	4.19	+1.23
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBMS vs. IAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMS Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is higher than the IAU Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMS and IAU, 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

	IBMS	IAU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.23	1.23	+1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.42	0.62	+0.80

Drawdowns

IBMS vs. IAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMS drawdown since its inception was -3.01%, smaller than the maximum IAU drawdown of -45.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMS and IAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMS	IAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-45.14%	+42.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.25%	-19.18%	+16.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-21.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.17%	-17.70%	+16.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.70%	-15.96%	+15.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.83%	7.71%	-6.88%

Volatility

IBMS vs. IAU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMS) is 0.59%, while iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that IBMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMS	IAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.59%	5.50%	-4.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.43%	23.02%	-21.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03%	26.42%	-24.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.07%	17.95%	-14.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.07%	15.90%	-12.83%

IBMS vs. IAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMS has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than IAU's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IBMS vs. IAU - Dividend Comparison

IBMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, while IAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
IAU iShares Gold Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBMS iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Muni Bond ETF	2.52%	2.49%	1.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMS and IAU in my portfolio?

IBMS and IAU 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.

Which is riskier, IBMS or IAU?

IAU has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to IBMS (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMS dropped -3.01% vs IAU's -45.14%.

Which ETF is better, IBMS or IAU?

On 1-year performance, IAU leads with 32.20% vs 4.50% for IBMS. On fees, IBMS is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMS has been the lower-risk option at 0.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMS or IAU?

Over the 1-year period, IAU has performed better with a 32.20% return vs 4.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMS or IAU?

IBMS is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IAU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBMS or IAU?

IBMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 0.00% for IAU.

What is the main difference between IBMS and IAU?

IBMS is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while IAU is Gold. IBMS tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2030 Index, while IAU tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMS and 0.25% for IAU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.23), 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.