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

Performance

IBMT vs. IBMN - 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 iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


IBMT

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

IBMN

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
0.00%
6M
0.00%
1Y
1.20%
3Y*
2.44%
5Y*
0.47%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBMT vs. IBMN - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IBMT and IBMN is 0.07, 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

0.07

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

0.11

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. IBMN — 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

IBMN
IBMN Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
IBMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMN Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMN Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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. IBMN - 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 iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN). 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.


IBMTIBMNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.66

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.06

6.02

-3.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.13

24.21

-18.09

IBMT vs. IBMN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBMT Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the IBMN Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBMT and IBMN, 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


IBMTIBMNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.05

2.12

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.63

0.58

+1.04

Drawdowns

IBMT vs. IBMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBMT drawdown since its inception was -3.18%, smaller than the maximum IBMN drawdown of -12.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBMT and IBMN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBMTIBMNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.18%

-12.40%

+9.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.10%

-0.25%

-2.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.65%

-0.05%

-1.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.74%

-1.81%

+1.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.04%

0.10%

+0.94%

Volatility

IBMT vs. IBMN - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMT) has a higher volatility of 0.78% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN) at 0.00%. This indicates that IBMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBMN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBMTIBMNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.78%

0.00%

+0.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.06%

0.50%

+1.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.11%

0.71%

+2.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.86%

1.80%

+2.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.86%

3.89%

-0.03%

IBMT vs. IBMN - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IBMT and IBMN have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IBMT vs. IBMN - Dividend Comparison

IBMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.65%, more than IBMN's 1.14% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
IBMN
iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF
1.14%2.03%2.03%1.72%0.97%0.70%1.11%1.65%0.23%
IBMT
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Muni Bond ETF
3.65%2.98%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBMT and IBMN have a correlation of 0.07, 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 IBMN (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBMT dropped -3.18% vs IBMN's -12.40%.

On 1-year performance, IBMT leads with 6.34% vs 1.20% for IBMN. Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. On volatility, IBMN has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IBMT has performed better with a 6.34% return vs 1.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBMT and IBMN have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.

IBMT has the higher dividend yield at 3.65%, compared with 1.14% for IBMN.

IBMT tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2031 Index, while IBMN tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2025 Index.

IBMN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 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 IBMN

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