IBMT vs. BPH

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

IBMT (iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF) and BPH (BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMT is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2031 Index, while BPH is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Precidian. IBMT is passively managed, while BPH is actively managed. Their -0.30 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. IBMT charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BPH.

Performance

IBMT vs. BPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMT) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

IBMT

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -1.16%
• 6M: -0.51%
• YTD: 0.37%
• 1Y: 3.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.63%

BPH

• 1D: 2.00%
• 1M: 18.84%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	$53.46K	$52.99K	$51.54K
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	$1.12M	$1.36M	$1.09M

IBMT vs. BPH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	1.01%
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	5.67%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMT and BPH is -0.30, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026	-0.30

Return for Risk

IBMT vs. BPH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IBMT

IBMT Risk / Return Rank: 46
IBMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IBMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
IBMT Omega Ratio Rank: 57
IBMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
IBMT Martin Ratio Rank: 34

BPH

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IBMT vs. BPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMT) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). 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.

	IBMT	BPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.33	—	—

Drawdowns

IBMT vs. BPH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMT drawdown since its inception was -3.18%, smaller than the maximum BPH drawdown of -15.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMT and BPH.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMT	BPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.18%	-15.58%	+12.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.47%	0.00%	-1.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-5.64%	+4.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBMT	BPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.65%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.38%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.05%	28.58%	-25.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.84%	28.58%	-24.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.84%	28.58%	-24.74%

IBMT vs. BPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMT has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BPH's 0.19% 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

IBMT vs. BPH - Dividend Comparison

IBMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.48%, more than BPH's 0.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	0.48%	0.00%
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	3.25%	2.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMT and BPH in my portfolio?

IBMT and BPH have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBMT or BPH?

On fees, IBMT 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, IBMT or BPH?

IBMT is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for BPH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBMT or BPH?

IBMT has the higher dividend yield at 3.25%, compared with 0.48% for BPH.

What is the main difference between IBMT and BPH?

IBMT is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while BPH is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Precidian. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMT and 0.19% for BPH.