PWZ vs. IBMM

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PWZ (Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and IBMM (iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - PWZ tracks the ICE BofA California Long-Term Core Plus Muni while IBMM tracks the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. Both are passively managed. PWZ charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMM.

Performance

PWZ vs. IBMM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

PWZ

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: 2.53%
• 6M: 2.73%
• 1Y: 8.84%
• 3Y*: 3.24%
• 5Y*: 0.17%
• 10Y*: 1.91%

IBMM

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PWZ vs. IBMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF	1.79%
IBMM iShares iBonds Dec 2024 Term Muni Bond ETF	0.00%

Return for Risk

PWZ vs. IBMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWZ

PWZ Risk / Return Rank: 58
PWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
PWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 69
PWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
PWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

PWZ vs. IBMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) 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.

	PWZ	IBMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.55	—	—
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

	PWZ	IBMM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.03	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.32	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	—	—

Drawdowns

PWZ vs. IBMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWZ drawdown since its inception was -21.49%, which is greater than IBMM's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWZ and IBMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PWZ	IBMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.49%	0.00%	-21.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.47%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.09%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.56%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	0.00%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.54%	0.00%	-3.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PWZ	IBMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.39%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.04%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.39%	0.00%	+4.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.25%	0.00%	+6.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.89%	0.00%	+5.89%

PWZ vs. IBMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWZ has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMM's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

PWZ vs. IBMM - Dividend Comparison

PWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, 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%
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF	3.57%	3.41%	3.28%	2.84%	2.49%	2.28%	2.34%	2.51%	2.53%	2.48%	2.86%	3.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, PWZ or IBMM?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, PWZ or IBMM?

IBMM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for PWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PWZ or IBMM?

PWZ has the higher dividend yield at 3.57%, compared with 0.00% for IBMM.

What is the main difference between PWZ and IBMM?

PWZ tracks ICE BofA California Long-Term Core Plus Muni, while IBMM tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Dec 2024 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PWZ and 0.18% for IBMM.