ZMUN vs. IBMQ
ZMUN (F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF) and IBMQ (iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds - ZMUN tracks the Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index while IBMQ tracks the S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2028 Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZMUN charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IBMQ.
Performance
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZMUN achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly higher than IBMQ's 0.85% return.
ZMUN
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 1.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBMQ
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.44%
- YTD
- 0.85%
- 6M
- 1.12%
- 1Y
- 3.24%
- 3Y*
- 2.85%
- 5Y*
- 0.48%
- 10Y*
- —
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 1.80% | 0.67% |
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF | 0.85% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZMUN and IBMQ is 0.12, 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 Sep 30, 2025 | 0.12 |
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
ZMUN vs. IBMQ — Risk / Return Rank
ZMUN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IBMQ
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF (ZMUN) and iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF (IBMQ). 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.
| ZMUN | IBMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.57 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.89 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.59 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZMUN drawdown since its inception was -0.10%, smaller than the maximum IBMQ drawdown of -15.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMUN and IBMQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZMUN | IBMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.10% | -15.85% | +15.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -3.57% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -11.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.17% | +0.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.01% | -3.24% | +3.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.43% | — |
Volatility
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZMUN | IBMQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.27% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.87% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.54% | 1.19% | -0.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.54% | 2.95% | -2.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.54% | 5.53% | -4.99% |
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZMUN has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than IBMQ's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZMUN vs. IBMQ - Dividend Comparison
ZMUN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.28%, less than IBMQ's 2.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBMQ iShares iBonds Dec 2028 Term Muni Bond ETF | 2.44% | 2.43% | 2.33% | 1.93% | 1.25% | 1.05% | 1.24% | 1.03% |
ZMUN F/m Ultrashort Tax-Free Municipal ETF | 2.28% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZMUN and IBMQ 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.
On fees, IBMQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBMQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ZMUN.
IBMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 2.28% for ZMUN.
ZMUN tracks Bloomberg Municipal Bond Currently Callable Index, while IBMQ tracks S&P AMT-Free Municipal Series Callable-Adjusted Dec 2028 Index. They also come from different issuers: F/m Investments and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ZMUN and 0.18% for IBMQ.
Find the right allocation for ZMUN and IBMQ
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