CMBS vs. LQD

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares CMBS ETF (CMBS) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD).

CMBS and LQD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CMBS is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Barclays Capital U.S. CMBS (ERISA Only) Index. It was launched on Feb 14, 2012. LQD is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. It was launched on Jul 26, 2002. Both CMBS and LQD are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CMBS vs. LQD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares CMBS ETF (CMBS) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CMBS vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CMBS iShares CMBS ETF	0.07%	7.67%	4.27%	5.06%	-11.21%	-1.82%	7.86%	7.94%	0.77%	2.95%
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF	-0.27%	7.90%	0.86%	9.40%	-17.92%	-1.84%	10.97%	17.37%	-3.79%	7.06%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMBS achieves a 0.07% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's -0.27% return. Over the past 10 years, CMBS has underperformed LQD with an annualized return of 2.18%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively higher 2.63% annualized return.

CMBS

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -1.30%
• YTD: 0.07%
• 6M: 1.21%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.31%
• 5Y*: 1.05%
• 10Y*: 2.18%

LQD

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -1.63%
• YTD: -0.27%
• 6M: -0.34%
• 1Y: 4.61%
• 3Y*: 4.30%
• 5Y*: 0.11%
• 10Y*: 2.63%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CMBS vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMBS has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

CMBS

iShares CMBS ETF

LQD

iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF

Return for Risk

CMBS vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CMBS

CMBS Risk / Return Rank: 68
CMBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
CMBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
CMBS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
CMBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
CMBS Martin Ratio Rank: 74

LQD

LQD Risk / Return Rank: 39
LQD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
LQD Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
LQD Omega Ratio Rank: 30
LQD Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
LQD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CMBS vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares CMBS ETF (CMBS) 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.

	CMBS	LQD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	0.70	+0.51
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	0.99	+0.82
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.13	+0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	1.48	+0.72
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.26	4.06	+4.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CMBS vs. LQD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMBS Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is higher than the LQD Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMBS and LQD, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CMBS	LQD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.21	0.70	+0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20	0.01	+0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38	0.30	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.54	-0.10

Correlation

The correlation between CMBS and LQD is 0.47, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CMBS vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison

CMBS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.53%, less than LQD's 4.56% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CMBS iShares CMBS ETF	3.53%	3.45%	3.31%	2.97%	2.65%	2.46%	2.83%	2.74%	2.70%	2.50%	2.29%	2.31%
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%

Drawdowns

CMBS vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMBS drawdown since its inception was -15.87%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMBS and LQD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMBS	LQD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.87%	-24.95%	+9.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.44%	-3.38%	+0.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.87%	-24.95%	+9.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-15.87%	-24.95%	+9.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.84%	-4.42%	+2.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.97%	-3.99%	+1.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.65%	1.23%	-0.58%

Volatility

CMBS vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares CMBS ETF (CMBS) is 1.49%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 2.66%. This indicates that CMBS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMBS	LQD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.49%	2.66%	-1.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.63%	3.76%	-1.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.92%	6.60%	-2.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.29%	8.65%	-3.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.77%	8.67%	-2.90%