AWF vs. LQD
AWF (AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both funds - AWF is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. AWF is actively managed, while LQD is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AWF returned 5.64%/yr vs 2.46%/yr for LQD. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AWF charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
AWF vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AWF achieves a -1.94% return, which is significantly lower than LQD's 0.61% return. Over the past 10 years, AWF has outperformed LQD with an annualized return of 5.64%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively lower 2.46% annualized return.
AWF
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.05%
- YTD
- -1.94%
- 6M
- -2.12%
- 1Y
- 0.20%
- 3Y*
- 9.29%
- 5Y*
- 3.69%
- 10Y*
- 5.64%
LQD
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 0.76%
- YTD
- 0.61%
- 6M
- 0.68%
- 1Y
- 5.23%
- 3Y*
- 4.88%
- 5Y*
- -0.24%
- 10Y*
- 2.46%
AWF vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AWF AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund | -1.94% | 7.54% | 14.30% | 18.37% | -16.62% | 9.95% | 4.40% | 23.40% | -11.35% | 7.77% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.61% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -3.79% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between AWF and LQD is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2002 | 0.18 |
The correlation between AWF and LQD shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (all time) to 0.41 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
AWF vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
AWF
LQD
AWF vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund (AWF) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD). 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.
| AWF | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.17 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.02 | 1.57 | -1.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.04 | 4.40 | -4.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AWF vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AWF drawdown since its inception was -55.54%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AWF and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AWF | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.54% | -24.95% | -30.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.19% | -3.34% | -6.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.12% | -8.43% | -2.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.25% | -24.95% | -0.30% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.12% | -24.95% | -15.17% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.03% | -3.58% | -2.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.30% | -3.99% | -8.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.45% | 1.19% | +3.26% |
Volatility
AWF vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund (AWF) has a higher volatility of 2.15% compared to iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) at 1.43%. This indicates that AWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AWF | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.15% | 1.43% | +0.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.35% | 3.99% | +3.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.80% | 5.33% | +3.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.11% | 8.65% | +3.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.22% | 8.69% | +6.53% |
AWF vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
AWF has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
AWF vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
AWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.75%, more than LQD's 4.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AWF AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund | 7.75% | 7.81% | 7.47% | 7.33% | 10.30% | 6.48% | 6.68% | 6.62% | 7.97% | 6.03% | 7.73% | 10.28% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.56% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AWF and LQD have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AWF has higher volatility (2.15%) compared to LQD (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AWF dropped -55.54% vs LQD's -24.95%.
LQD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.99 vs 0.02), 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.
Find the right allocation for AWF and LQD
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