NYF vs. IBMM
NYF (iShares New York Muni Bond ETF) and IBMM (iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds from iShares - NYF tracks the S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index while IBMM tracks the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. Both are passively managed. NYF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMM.
Performance
NYF vs. IBMM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NYF
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 1.91%
- 1Y
- 6.81%
- 3Y*
- 3.36%
- 5Y*
- 0.83%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
IBMM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NYF vs. IBMM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 0.49% |
IBMM iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.00% |
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
NYF vs. IBMM — Risk / Return Rank
NYF
IBMM
NYF vs. IBMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares New York Muni Bond ETF (NYF) 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.
| NYF | IBMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.88 | — | — |
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
| NYF | IBMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.40 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | — | — |
Drawdowns
NYF vs. IBMM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NYF drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, which is greater than IBMM's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NYF and IBMM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NYF | IBMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.12% | 0.00% | -13.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.68% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.71% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.56% | 0.00% | -0.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.31% | 0.00% | -2.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.77% | — | — |
Volatility
NYF vs. IBMM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NYF | IBMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.95% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.08% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.78% | 0.00% | +2.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.00% | 0.00% | +4.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.48% | 0.00% | +4.48% |
NYF vs. IBMM - Expense Ratio Comparison
NYF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMM's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
NYF vs. IBMM - Dividend Comparison
NYF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.09%, while IBMM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 3.09% | 2.99% | 2.77% | 2.36% | 2.04% | 1.85% | 1.98% | 2.19% | 2.48% | 2.46% | 2.43% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, IBMM is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBMM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for NYF.
NYF has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 0.00% for IBMM.
NYF tracks S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IBMM tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for NYF and 0.18% for IBMM.
Find the right allocation for NYF 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