MMCA vs. IBMO
MMCA (IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF) and IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MMCA is actively managed, while IBMO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MMCA returned 4.10%/yr vs 2.93%/yr for IBMO. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MMCA charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMO.
Performance
MMCA vs. IBMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MMCA achieves a 0.80% return, which is significantly lower than IBMO's 0.95% return.
MMCA
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 0.80%
- 6M
- 1.19%
- 1Y
- 6.28%
- 3Y*
- 4.10%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMO
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- YTD
- 0.95%
- 6M
- 1.30%
- 1Y
- 2.78%
- 3Y*
- 2.93%
- 5Y*
- 0.67%
- 10Y*
- —
MMCA vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 0.80% | 5.74% | 1.70% | 5.77% | -12.15% | 0.01% |
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.95% | 3.11% | 1.97% | 2.90% | -5.36% | 0.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between MMCA and IBMO is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2021 | 0.50 |
Over the past year, the correlation between MMCA and IBMO has dropped to 0.13 - well below their long-term average of 0.50, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
MMCA vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank
MMCA
IBMO
MMCA vs. IBMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) 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.
| MMCA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.53 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.10 | 7.38 | -5.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.64 | 21.93 | -15.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MMCA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.44 | 2.54 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.31 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.05 | 0.41 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
MMCA vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MMCA drawdown since its inception was -15.97%, which is greater than IBMO's maximum drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMCA and IBMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MMCA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.97% | -14.77% | -1.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.01% | -0.38% | -2.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.68% | -1.76% | -1.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -8.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.39% | 0.00% | -1.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.04% | -2.32% | -4.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.95% | 0.13% | +0.82% |
Volatility
MMCA vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison
IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF (MMCA) has a higher volatility of 0.90% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) at 0.19%. This indicates that MMCA'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MMCA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.90% | 0.19% | +0.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.89% | 0.83% | +1.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.60% | 1.10% | +1.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.60% | 2.15% | +1.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.60% | 4.52% | -0.92% |
MMCA vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MMCA has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMO's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
MMCA vs. IBMO - Dividend Comparison
MMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, 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% |
MMCA IQ MacKay California Municipal Intermediate ETF | 3.29% | 3.39% | 3.66% | 3.57% | 2.90% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MMCA and IBMO have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MMCA has higher volatility (0.90%) compared to IBMO (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMCA dropped -15.97% vs IBMO's -14.77%.
On 3-year performance, MMCA leads with 4.10% vs 2.93% for IBMO. On fees, IBMO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IBMO has been the lower-risk option at 0.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MMCA has performed better with a 4.10% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBMO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MMCA.
MMCA has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.39% for IBMO.
They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MMCA and 0.18% for IBMO.
IBMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.44), 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.
Find the right allocation for MMCA and IBMO
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