LMUB vs. IBMO

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

LMUB (iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF) and IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds from iShares - LMUB tracks the ICE AMT-Free US Long National Municipal Index while IBMO tracks the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2026 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LMUB returned 9.16% vs 2.54% for IBMO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LMUB charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMO.

Performance

LMUB vs. IBMO - 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 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LMUB achieves a 2.73% return, which is significantly higher than IBMO's 0.97% return.

LMUB

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 2.41%
• YTD: 2.73%
• 6M: 2.76%
• 1Y: 9.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBMO

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.13%
• YTD: 0.97%
• 6M: 0.96%
• 1Y: 2.54%
• 3Y*: 2.82%
• 5Y*: 0.67%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LMUB vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LMUB iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF	2.73%	3.52%
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.97%	2.35%

Correlation

The correlation between LMUB and IBMO is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2025	0.12

Return for Risk

LMUB vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LMUB

LMUB Risk / Return Rank: 69
LMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
LMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
LMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 80
LMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
LMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 60

IBMO

IBMO Risk / Return Rank: 88
IBMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IBMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
IBMO Omega Ratio Rank: 85
IBMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
IBMO Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. IBMO - 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 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO). 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.

	LMUB	IBMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	2.40	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.19	3.87	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.49	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	7.02	-4.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.30	20.83	-10.53

LMUB vs. IBMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LMUB Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the IBMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LMUB and IBMO, 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

LMUB vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LMUB drawdown since its inception was -5.51%, smaller than the maximum IBMO drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LMUB and IBMO.

Drawdown Indicators

	LMUB	IBMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.51%	-14.77%	+9.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.11%	-0.38%	-2.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-8.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.05%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.55%	-2.31%	+0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.88%	0.13%	+0.75%

Volatility

LMUB vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) has a higher volatility of 1.06% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) at 0.22%. This indicates that LMUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LMUB	IBMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.06%	0.22%	+0.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.97%	0.80%	+2.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.15%	1.10%	+3.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.87%	2.14%	+3.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.87%	4.50%	+1.37%

LMUB vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LMUB has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than IBMO'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. IBMO - Dividend Comparison

LMUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.76%, more than IBMO's 2.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF	2.39%	2.37%	2.15%	1.65%	0.89%	0.62%	1.03%	1.01%
LMUB iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF	3.76%	3.14%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LMUB and IBMO in my portfolio?

LMUB and IBMO have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LMUB or IBMO?

LMUB has higher volatility (1.06%) compared to IBMO (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LMUB dropped -5.51% vs IBMO's -14.77%.

Which ETF is better, LMUB or IBMO?

On 1-year performance, LMUB leads with 9.16% vs 2.54% for IBMO. On fees, LMUB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IBMO has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LMUB or IBMO?

Over the 1-year period, LMUB has performed better with a 9.16% return vs 2.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LMUB or IBMO?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LMUB or IBMO?

LMUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.76%, compared with 2.39% for IBMO.

What is the main difference between LMUB and IBMO?

LMUB tracks ICE AMT-Free US Long National Municipal Index, while IBMO tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2026 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for LMUB and 0.18% for IBMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.20), 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.