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

Performance

LMUB vs. IBMN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) 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


LMUB

1D
0.01%
1M
0.90%
YTD
2.32%
6M
2.47%
1Y
9.37%
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)

LMUB vs. IBMN - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LMUB and IBMN is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2025

0.13

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

LMUB vs. IBMN — Risk / Return Rank

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

LMUB
LMUB Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
LMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
LMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
LMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
LMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

LMUB vs. IBMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) 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.


LMUBIBMNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.66

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.02

6.02

-3.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.61

24.21

-13.61

LMUB vs. IBMN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LMUB Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the IBMN Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LMUB 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


LMUBIBMNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.24

2.12

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.82

0.58

+0.24

Drawdowns

LMUB vs. IBMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LMUB drawdown since its inception was -5.51%, smaller than the maximum IBMN drawdown of -12.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LMUB and IBMN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LMUBIBMNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.51%

-12.40%

+6.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.11%

-0.25%

-2.86%

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

0.00%

-0.05%

+0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.61%

-1.81%

+0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.89%

0.10%

+0.79%

Volatility

LMUB vs. IBMN - Volatility Comparison

iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) has a higher volatility of 1.44% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMN) at 0.00%. This indicates that LMUB'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


LMUBIBMNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.44%

0.00%

+1.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.05%

0.50%

+2.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.21%

0.71%

+3.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.97%

1.80%

+4.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.97%

3.89%

+2.08%

LMUB vs. IBMN - Expense Ratio Comparison

LMUB has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than IBMN's 0.18% 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

LMUB vs. IBMN - Dividend Comparison

LMUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.77%, 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%
LMUB
iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF
3.77%3.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LMUB 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.

LMUB has higher volatility (1.44%) compared to IBMN (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LMUB dropped -5.51% vs IBMN's -12.40%.

On 1-year performance, LMUB leads with 9.37% vs 1.20% for IBMN. On fees, LMUB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. 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, LMUB has performed better with a 9.37% return vs 1.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LMUB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMN.

LMUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.77%, compared with 1.14% for IBMN.

LMUB tracks ICE AMT-Free US Long National Municipal Index, while IBMN tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2025 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for LMUB and 0.18% for IBMN.

LMUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 2.12), 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 LMUB 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