CSHI vs. LQD
CSHI (NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSHI is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Neos, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. CSHI is actively managed, while LQD is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CSHI returned 5.40%/yr vs 4.95%/yr for LQD. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSHI charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
CSHI vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSHI achieves a 2.22% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's -0.06% return.
CSHI
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 2.22%
- 6M
- 2.51%
- 1Y
- 5.13%
- 3Y*
- 5.40%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQD
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- -0.06%
- 6M
- -0.06%
- 1Y
- 5.73%
- 3Y*
- 4.95%
- 5Y*
- -0.28%
- 10Y*
- 2.41%
CSHI vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHI NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 2.22% | 5.05% | 5.66% | 6.21% | 1.46% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -0.06% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -3.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSHI and LQD is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2022 | 0.11 |
The correlation between CSHI and LQD shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (3 years) to 0.23 (1 year), 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
CSHI vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
CSHI
LQD
CSHI vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CSHI) 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.
| CSHI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +4.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +8.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.61 | 1.19 | +1.42 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 25.71 | 1.72 | +23.99 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 141.38 | 4.88 | +136.50 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CSHI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.80 | 1.08 | +4.71 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.03 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 4.15 | 0.54 | +3.61 |
Drawdowns
CSHI vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSHI drawdown since its inception was -1.69%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSHI and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSHI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.69% | -24.95% | +23.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.20% | -3.34% | +3.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.69% | -8.43% | +6.74% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.95% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.95% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | -4.21% | +4.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.03% | -3.99% | +3.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.04% | 1.18% | -1.14% |
Volatility
CSHI vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CSHI) is 0.27%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 1.62%. This indicates that CSHI 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSHI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.27% | 1.62% | -1.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.57% | 3.94% | -3.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89% | 5.32% | -4.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 8.65% | -7.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 8.68% | -7.35% |
CSHI vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSHI has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSHI vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
CSHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.91%, more than LQD's 4.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHI NEOS Enhanced Income 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 4.91% | 5.11% | 5.72% | 6.15% | 1.52% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.59% | 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
CSHI and LQD have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQD has higher volatility (1.62%) compared to CSHI (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSHI dropped -1.69% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 3-year performance, CSHI leads with 5.40% vs 4.95% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CSHI has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CSHI has performed better with a 5.40% return vs 4.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for CSHI.
CSHI has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 4.59% for LQD.
CSHI is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Neos and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for CSHI and 0.15% for LQD.
CSHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.80 vs 1.08), 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 CSHI 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