PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MUB vs. IBMM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MUB vs. IBMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


MUB

1D
-0.08%
1M
0.56%
YTD
1.24%
6M
1.74%
1Y
6.95%
3Y*
3.43%
5Y*
0.86%
10Y*
2.00%

IBMM

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

MUB vs. IBMM - Yearly Performance Comparison


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

MUB vs. IBMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUB
MUB Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
MUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
MUB Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
MUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
MUB Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

IBMM
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.

MUB vs. IBMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMM). 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.


MUBIBMMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.85

MUB vs. IBMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MUBIBMMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.21

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

Drawdowns

MUB vs. IBMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, which is greater than IBMM's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUB and IBMM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MUBIBMMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.68%

0.00%

-13.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.79%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-13.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.70%

0.00%

-0.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.23%

0.00%

-2.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.79%

Volatility

MUB vs. IBMM - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MUBIBMMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.92%

0.00%

+2.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.06%

0.00%

+4.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.92%

0.00%

+4.92%

MUB vs. IBMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than IBMM'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

MUB vs. IBMM - Dividend Comparison

MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, while IBMM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBMM
iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MUB
iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF
3.17%3.14%3.01%2.65%2.11%1.81%2.11%2.42%2.46%2.26%2.21%2.51%

Frequently Asked Questions


On fees, MUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMM.

MUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 0.00% for IBMM.

MUB tracks S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IBMM tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for MUB and 0.18% for IBMM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MUB and IBMM

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