MUB vs. IBMM

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMM).

MUB and IBMM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. MUB is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. It was launched on Sep 7, 2007. IBMM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. It was launched on Mar 20, 2018. Both MUB and IBMM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

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.

MUB vs. IBMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF	-1.16%
IBMM iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.00%

Returns By Period

MUB

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -2.28%
• YTD: -0.37%
• 6M: 1.28%
• 1Y: 3.94%
• 3Y*: 2.53%
• 5Y*: 0.79%
• 10Y*: 1.96%

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 - 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%.

IBMM

iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF

MUB

iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF

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: 54
MUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
MUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
MUB Omega Ratio Rank: 60
MUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
MUB Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

	MUB	IBMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.96	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.25	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.27	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.07	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MUB	IBMM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.40	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	—	—

Dividends

MUB vs. IBMM - Dividend Comparison

MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.19%, while IBMM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF	3.19%	3.14%	3.01%	2.65%	2.11%	1.81%	2.11%	2.42%	2.46%	2.26%	2.21%	2.51%
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%

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUB	IBMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.68%	0.00%	-13.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.30%	—	—
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	-2.28%	0.00%	-2.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.24%	0.00%	-2.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MUB	IBMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.53%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.03%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.14%	0.00%	+4.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.04%	0.00%	+4.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.91%	0.00%	+4.91%