Screener
INTM vs PZA
Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF vs Invesco National AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF
Key differences
- PZA costs 0.07% less per year.
- PZA is significantly larger than INTM — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- INTM follows a active selection strategy; PZA uses index tracking.
- PZA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| INTM | PZA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.28% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $101M | $4.0B |
| Since | 2025 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | — | 3.63% |
| Asset class | fixed income | fixed income |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +6.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +2.7% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | -0.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | -0.12 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 4.20% |
| Max drawdown | -2.65% | -21.69% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to INTM and PZA
Explore further