IBMQ ranks 1st and MUNA 12th of 32 funds in the Defined-Maturity Municipal Category.
IBMQ vs MUNA
IBMQ −0.08pt a year
0.10%0.18%
IBMQ 76.0×the volume
138K1.82K
IBMQ vs MUNA Performance
+2.3%+2.5%
- IBMQ 0.10%, better
- MUNA 0.18%
- IBMQ $692M
- MUNA $8M
- IBMQ +2.3%
- MUNA +2.5%, better
- IBMQ 2.49%, better
- MUNA 2.28%
- IBMQ 2968
- MUNA 228
- IBMQ 138K sh, better
- MUNA 1.82K sh
- IBMQ $25.43
- MUNA $99.85
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IBMQ | MUNA |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A87Higher | C45 |
| Mission | A100Higher | A79 |
| Risk | B59 | A72Higher |
| Tradability | A92Higher | C42 |
| Holdings | A93Higher | B59 |
| Durability | A94Higher | D31 |
Rank among Defined-Maturity Municipal funds
Same Category. IBMQ and MUNA are both graded against the same 32 Defined-Maturity Municipal funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
IBMQA
MUNAB
In short
IBMQ A muni ladder rung in ETF form: thousands of investment-grade bonds that mature or get called by late 2028, then the fund winds up and pays out. AMT-free index, income paid monthly.
MUNA Most target-maturity bond funds are a single rung. MUNA is the whole staircase: an actively managed muni ladder with rungs maturing each year through 2030 that pays principal back as it goes, then liquidates in the terminal year.
Stated mandate
IBMQ The fund seeks to track an index of investment-grade U.S. municipal bonds that are expected to mature or be redeemed before December 2, 2028.
MUNA The Fund seeks periodic distributions of federally tax-exempt income and/or principal through 2030. It uses a laddered municipal-bond strategy with maturities across annual rungs through the terminal year.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
IBMQ vs MUNA Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
IBMQ vs MUNA Cost
Overpaying MUNA vs IBMQ
$1,643
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IBMQ 0.10%
$2,106
MUNA 0.18%
$3,749
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IBMQ | MUNA | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $183 | $328 | $145 |
| 20 | $717 | $1,281 | $564 |
| 30 | $2,106 | $3,749 | $1,643 |
- 0.10%IBMQ, cheaper
- 0.18%MUNA
- Middle half of Defined-Maturity Municipal funds
- Median 0.18%
IBMQ cheapest of 32 funds
MUNA 10th cheapest of 32 funds
IBMQ vs MUNA Dividends
- IBMQ 2.49%, better
- MUNA 2.28%
- IBMQ $0.63
- MUNA $2.28
- IBMQ $0.06
- MUNA $0.22
- IBMQ Nov 2, 2026
- MUNA Nov 2, 2026
- IBMQ Nov 5, 2026
- MUNA Nov 6, 2026
- IBMQ Monthly
- MUNA Monthly
Distribution history
IBMQ vs MUNA Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IBMQ 3.3%MUNA 2.6%
- Return per unit of risk
- IBMQ −0.14MUNA −0.65
- Worst fall
- IBMQ −10.8%MUNA −2.1%
- Market sensitivity
- IBMQ 0.54MUNA 0.04
IBMQ and MUNA in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.10% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.18% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.10% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.18% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.10% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.18% · 0.10%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
