PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SUB vs. IBMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SUB vs. IBMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SUB achieves a 0.93% return, which is significantly lower than IBMO's 1.01% return.


SUB

1D
0.00%
1M
0.52%
YTD
0.93%
6M
1.10%
1Y
2.93%
3Y*
3.08%
5Y*
1.51%
10Y*
1.46%

IBMO

1D
0.04%
1M
0.17%
YTD
1.01%
6M
1.02%
1Y
2.58%
3Y*
2.79%
5Y*
0.70%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SUB vs. IBMO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
SUB
iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF
0.93%3.64%2.17%2.91%-2.05%0.03%2.51%2.14%
IBMO
iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF
1.01%3.11%1.97%2.90%-5.36%-0.16%5.48%4.69%

Correlation

The correlation between SUB and IBMO is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.12

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.43

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2019

0.49

Over the past year, the correlation between SUB and IBMO has dropped to 0.12 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

SUB vs. IBMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

SUB
SUB Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
SUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
SUB Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
SUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
SUB Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

IBMO
IBMO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
IBMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBMO Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
IBMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBMO Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SUB vs. IBMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB) 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.


SUBIBMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

1.48

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.65

6.84

-3.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.32

20.33

-10.01

SUB vs. IBMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SUB Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the IBMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SUB and IBMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SUB vs. IBMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SUB drawdown since its inception was -9.46%, smaller than the maximum IBMO drawdown of -14.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SUB and IBMO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SUBIBMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.46%

-14.77%

+5.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.81%

-0.38%

-0.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.23%

-1.76%

+0.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-4.35%

-8.86%

+4.51%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-9.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.01%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.91%

-2.31%

+1.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.28%

0.13%

+0.15%

Volatility

SUB vs. IBMO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF (SUB) has a higher volatility of 0.25% compared to iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMO) at 0.22%. This indicates that SUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SUBIBMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.25%

0.22%

+0.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.80%

0.79%

+0.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.01%

1.10%

-0.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.64%

2.14%

-0.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.60%

4.50%

-1.90%

SUB vs. IBMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

SUB has a 0.07% 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

SUB vs. IBMO - Dividend Comparison

SUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, more than IBMO's 2.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SUB
iShares Short-Term National Muni Bond ETF
2.52%2.42%2.10%1.73%0.86%0.72%1.23%1.58%1.32%0.95%0.75%0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions


SUB and IBMO have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SUB has higher volatility (0.25%) compared to IBMO (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SUB dropped -9.46% vs IBMO's -14.77%.

On 5-year performance, SUB leads with 1.51% vs 0.70% for IBMO. On fees, SUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, SUB has performed better with a 1.51% return vs 0.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IBMO.

SUB has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 2.39% for IBMO.

SUB tracks ICE Short Maturity AMT-Free US National Municipal Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IBMO tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2026 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for SUB and 0.18% for IBMO.

SUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.35), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SUB 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