MUNA vs. IBMO
MUNA (Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF) and IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. MUNA is actively managed, while IBMO is passively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.18% expense ratio.
Performance
MUNA vs. IBMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUNA achieves a 1.42% return, which is significantly higher than IBMO's 0.97% return.
MUNA
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- YTD
- 1.42%
- 6M
- 1.45%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMO
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 0.97%
- 6M
- 1.00%
- 1Y
- 2.48%
- 3Y*
- 2.78%
- 5Y*
- 0.71%
- 10Y*
- —
MUNA vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MUNA Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.42% | 0.68% |
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.97% | 0.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between MUNA and IBMO is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2025 | 0.20 |
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
MUNA vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank
MUNA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IBMO
MUNA vs. IBMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF (MUNA) 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.
| MUNA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.45 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 6.58 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 19.52 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUNA vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUNA drawdown since its inception was -0.91%, smaller than the maximum IBMO drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUNA and IBMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUNA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.91% | -14.77% | +13.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.76% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -8.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.56% | -0.08% | -0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.27% | -2.30% | +2.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.13% | — |
Volatility
MUNA vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUNA | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.24% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.79% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.83% | 1.11% | +0.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.83% | 2.14% | -0.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.83% | 4.50% | -2.67% |
MUNA vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both MUNA and IBMO have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
MUNA vs. IBMO - Dividend Comparison
MUNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, less 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% |
MUNA Northern Trust 2030 Tax-Exempt Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.66% | 0.76% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUNA and IBMO have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUNA and IBMO have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.
IBMO has the higher dividend yield at 2.39%, compared with 1.66% for MUNA.
They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and iShares.
Find the right allocation for MUNA 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