PUSH vs. IBMO
PUSH (PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF) and IBMO (iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. PUSH is actively managed, while IBMO is passively managed. Over the past year, PUSH returned 3.07% vs 2.34% for IBMO. Their 0.08 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PUSH charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMO.
Performance
PUSH vs. IBMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PUSH achieves a 1.58% return, which is significantly higher than IBMO's 1.22% return.
PUSH
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.04%
- 6M
- 1.00%
- YTD
- 1.58%
- 1Y
- 3.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.58%
IBMO
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.16%
- 6M
- 1.09%
- YTD
- 1.22%
- 1Y
- 2.34%
- 3Y*
- 3.01%
- 5Y*
- 0.62%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 1.84%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.89M | $1.94M | $1.71M | |
| $1.12M | $1.04M | $958.85K |
PUSH vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 1.58% | 4.16% | 1.74% |
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 1.22% | 3.11% | 1.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between PUSH and IBMO is -0.05, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2024 | 0.08 |
The correlation between PUSH and IBMO shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.08 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
PUSH vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank
PUSH
IBMO
PUSH vs. IBMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) 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.
| PUSH | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.41 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.15 | 6.22 | -0.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.15 | 18.35 | -3.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PUSH vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PUSH drawdown since its inception was -0.85%, smaller than the maximum IBMO drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PUSH and IBMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PUSH | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.85% | -14.77% | +13.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.50% | -0.38% | -0.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.21% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -8.77% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | -0.04% | -0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.10% | -2.27% | +2.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.20% | 0.13% | +0.07% |
Volatility
PUSH vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) is 0.24%, while iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) has a volatility of 0.36%. This indicates that PUSH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PUSH | IBMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.24% | 0.36% | -0.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.62% | 0.72% | -0.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.51% | 1.14% | +0.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.27% | 2.14% | -0.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.27% | 4.47% | -3.20% |
PUSH vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
PUSH has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IBMO'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
PUSH vs. IBMO - Dividend Comparison
PUSH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than IBMO's 2.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBMO iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.40% | 2.37% | 2.15% | 1.65% | 0.89% | 0.62% | 1.03% | 1.01% |
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 3.17% | 3.45% | 1.86% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PUSH and IBMO have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBMO has higher volatility (0.36%) compared to PUSH (0.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PUSH dropped -0.85% vs IBMO's -14.77%.
On 1-year performance, PUSH leads with 3.07% vs 2.34% for IBMO. On fees, PUSH is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PUSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PUSH has performed better with a 3.07% return vs 2.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PUSH is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMO.
PUSH has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 2.40% for IBMO.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PUSH and 0.18% for IBMO.
IBMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 2.05), 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 PUSH 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