IBMQ ranks 1st and MUND 21st of 32 funds in the Defined-Maturity Municipal Category.
IBMQ vs MUND
IBMQ −0.08pt a year
0.10%0.18%
IBMQ 79.3×the volume
138K1.74K
IBMQ vs MUND Performance
+2.3%+2.2%
- IBMQ 0.10%, better
- MUND 0.18%
- IBMQ $692M
- MUND $10M
- IBMQ +2.3%, better
- MUND +2.2%
- IBMQ 2.49%
- MUND 3.61%, better
- IBMQ 2968
- MUND 190
- IBMQ 138K sh, better
- MUND 1.74K sh
- IBMQ $25.43
- MUND $101.48
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IBMQ | MUND |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A87Higher | C45 |
| Mission | A100 | |
| Risk | B59Higher | D32 |
| Tradability | A92Higher | D33 |
| Holdings | A93Higher | B56 |
| Durability | A94Higher | D37 |
Rank among Defined-Maturity Municipal funds
Same Category. IBMQ and MUND are both graded against the same 32 Defined-Maturity Municipal funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
IBMQA
MUNDC
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.
MUND A municipal bond ladder in one ticket: bonds maturing on a schedule through 2055, federally tax-exempt income paid monthly, and principal handed back as rungs mature. Built to wind down by its terminal year, not run forever.
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.
MUND The Fund seeks periodic distributions of federally tax-exempt income and/or principal through 2055. It uses a laddered strategy investing in municipal debt instruments with different maturity dates through the 2055 terminal year.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
IBMQ vs MUND 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 MUND Cost
Overpaying MUND vs IBMQ
$1,643
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IBMQ 0.10%
$2,106
MUND 0.18%
$3,749
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IBMQ | MUND | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $183 | $328 | $145 |
| 20 | $717 | $1,281 | $564 |
| 30 | $2,106 | $3,749 | $1,643 |
- 0.10%IBMQ, cheaper
- 0.18%MUND
- Middle half of Defined-Maturity Municipal funds
- Median 0.18%
IBMQ cheapest of 32 funds
MUND 10th cheapest of 32 funds
IBMQ vs MUND Dividends
- IBMQ 2.49%
- MUND 3.61%, better
- IBMQ $0.63
- MUND $3.67
- IBMQ $0.06
- MUND $0.28
- IBMQ Nov 2, 2026
- MUND Nov 2, 2026
- IBMQ Nov 5, 2026
- MUND Nov 6, 2026
- IBMQ Monthly
- MUND Monthly
Distribution history
IBMQ vs MUND Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IBMQ 3.3%MUND 6.8%
- Return per unit of risk
- IBMQ −0.14MUND 0.05
- Worst fall
- IBMQ −10.8%MUND −8.0%
- Market sensitivity
- IBMQ 0.54MUND 0.18
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.