IBMT vs. FBDC

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

IBMT (iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF) and FBDC (FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBMT is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2031 Index, while FBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. IBMT is passively managed, while FBDC is actively managed. Over the past year, IBMT returned 3.08% vs -10.92% for FBDC. Their 0.02 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IBMT charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for FBDC.

Performance

IBMT vs. FBDC - 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 FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBMT achieves a 0.37% return, which is significantly higher than FBDC's -7.31% return.

IBMT

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

FBDC

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: -0.49%
• 6M: -6.64%
• YTD: -7.31%
• 1Y: -10.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -9.05%

*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)
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	$213.26K	$189.97K	$198.06K
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	$1.12M	$1.36M	$1.09M

IBMT vs. FBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.37%	3.75%
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	-7.31%	-2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between IBMT and FBDC is 0.06, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2025	0.02

Return for Risk

IBMT vs. FBDC — 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

FBDC

FBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
FBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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. FBDC - 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 FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). 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	FBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	-0.64	+1.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	-0.82	+2.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	0.91	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	-0.64	+1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.33	-1.14	+4.47

IBMT vs. FBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is higher than the FBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMT and FBDC, 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

IBMT vs. FBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMT drawdown since its inception was -3.18%, smaller than the maximum FBDC drawdown of -20.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMT and FBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBMT	FBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.18%	-20.60%	+17.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.10%	-18.08%	+14.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.47%	-15.23%	+13.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-10.91%	+10.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	10.12%	-9.00%

Volatility

IBMT vs. FBDC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMT) is 0.65%, while FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that IBMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBMT	FBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.65%	4.72%	-4.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.38%	14.60%	-12.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.05%	18.15%	-15.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.84%	17.81%	-13.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.84%	17.81%	-13.97%

IBMT vs. FBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBMT has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FBDC's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBMT vs. FBDC - Dividend Comparison

IBMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.48%, less than FBDC's 12.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	12.36%	5.41%
IBMT iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF	3.25%	2.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBMT and FBDC in my portfolio?

IBMT and FBDC have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBMT or FBDC?

FBDC has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to IBMT (0.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMT dropped -3.18% vs FBDC's -20.60%.

Which ETF is better, IBMT or FBDC?

On 1-year performance, IBMT leads with 3.08% vs -10.92% for FBDC. On fees, IBMT is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMT has been the lower-risk option at 0.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBMT or FBDC?

Over the 1-year period, IBMT has performed better with a 3.08% return vs -10.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBMT or FBDC?

IBMT is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for FBDC.

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

FBDC has the higher dividend yield at 12.36%, compared with 3.25% for IBMT.

What is the main difference between IBMT and FBDC?

IBMT is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FBDC is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IBMT and 1.35% for FBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.23 vs -0.64), 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.