PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBMT vs. CA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBMT vs. CA - 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 Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMT achieves a 0.19% return, which is significantly lower than CA's 1.20% return.


IBMT

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.35%
YTD
0.19%
6M
0.25%
1Y
6.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CA

1D
0.00%
1M
0.38%
YTD
1.20%
6M
1.44%
1Y
6.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBMT vs. CA - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IBMT and CA is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025

0.46

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

IBMT vs. CA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBMT
IBMT Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
IBMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMT Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMT Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank

CA
CA Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
CA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
CA Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
CA Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
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.

IBMT vs. CA - 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 Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA). 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.


IBMTCADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.58

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.06

2.61

-0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.13

9.84

-3.71

IBMT vs. CA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the CA Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMT and CA, 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


IBMTCADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.05

2.54

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.63

0.67

+0.96

Drawdowns

IBMT vs. CA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMT drawdown since its inception was -3.18%, smaller than the maximum CA drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMT and CA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBMTCADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.18%

-5.24%

+2.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.10%

-2.57%

-0.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.65%

-0.75%

-0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.74%

-1.27%

+0.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.04%

0.68%

+0.36%

Volatility

IBMT vs. CA - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMT) has a higher volatility of 0.78% compared to Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF (CA) at 0.31%. This indicates that IBMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBMTCADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.78%

0.31%

+0.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.06%

1.83%

+0.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.11%

2.64%

+0.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.86%

3.99%

-0.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.86%

3.99%

-0.13%

IBMT vs. CA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMT has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than CA's 0.07% expense ratio. However, 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. CA - Dividend Comparison

IBMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.65%, more than CA's 2.96% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
CA
Xtrackers California Municipal Bond ETF
2.96%3.14%3.03%
IBMT
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF
3.65%2.98%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBMT and CA have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IBMT has higher volatility (0.78%) compared to CA (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMT dropped -3.18% vs CA's -5.24%.

On 1-year performance, CA leads with 6.67% vs 6.34% for IBMT. On fees, CA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, CA has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CA has performed better with a 6.67% return vs 6.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMT.

IBMT has the higher dividend yield at 3.65%, compared with 2.96% for CA.

IBMT tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2031 Index, while CA tracks ICE AMT-Free Broad Liquid California Municipal Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMT and 0.07% for CA.

CA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.05), 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 IBMT and CA

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