INTM vs. IBMN
INTM (Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF) and IBMN (iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. INTM is actively managed, while IBMN is passively managed. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INTM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMN.
Performance
INTM vs. IBMN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
INTM
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 1.82%
- 6M
- 2.27%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMN
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.00%
- 1Y
- 1.20%
- 3Y*
- 2.40%
- 5Y*
- 0.47%
- 10Y*
- —
INTM vs. IBMN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
INTM Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF | 1.82% | 4.72% |
IBMN iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.00% | 0.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between INTM and IBMN is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025 | 0.12 |
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
INTM vs. IBMN — Risk / Return Rank
INTM
IBMN
INTM vs. IBMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF (INTM) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| INTM | IBMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.12 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 3.05 | 0.58 | +2.46 |
Drawdowns
INTM vs. IBMN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INTM drawdown since its inception was -2.65%, smaller than the maximum IBMN drawdown of -12.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTM and IBMN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INTM | IBMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.65% | -12.40% | +9.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.25% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.10% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -7.36% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.54% | -0.05% | -0.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.48% | -1.81% | +1.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.10% | — |
Volatility
INTM vs. IBMN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INTM | IBMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.00% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.50% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.53% | 0.71% | +1.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.53% | 1.79% | +0.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.53% | 3.89% | -1.36% |
INTM vs. IBMN - Expense Ratio Comparison
INTM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMN's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
INTM vs. IBMN - Dividend Comparison
INTM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, more than IBMN's 1.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
INTM Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF | 2.62% | 1.15% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INTM and IBMN have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBMN is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBMN is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for INTM.
INTM has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 1.14% for IBMN.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for INTM and 0.18% for IBMN.
Find the right allocation for INTM 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