HYGW vs. LDRH

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HYGW (iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) and LDRH (iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF) are both High Yield Bonds funds from iShares - HYGW tracks the Cboe HYG BuyWrite Index while LDRH tracks the BlackRock iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, HYGW returned 6.67% vs 6.30% for LDRH. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HYGW charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for LDRH.

Performance

HYGW vs. LDRH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) and iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HYGW having a 1.89% return and LDRH slightly lower at 1.88%.

HYGW

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 0.66%
• YTD: 1.89%
• 6M: 2.47%
• 1Y: 6.67%
• 3Y*: 5.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LDRH

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.88%
• 6M: 2.45%
• 1Y: 6.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HYGW vs. LDRH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
HYGW iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF	1.89%	6.19%	-0.61%
LDRH iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF	1.88%	7.18%	0.21%

Correlation

The correlation between HYGW and LDRH is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2024	0.58

The correlation between HYGW and LDRH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

HYGW vs. LDRH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HYGW	LDRH
Utilities	99.6%	-
Real Estate	0.4%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

HYGW vs. LDRH — Risk / Return Rank

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

HYGW

HYGW Risk / Return Rank: 80
HYGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
HYGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
HYGW Omega Ratio Rank: 86
HYGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
HYGW Martin Ratio Rank: 84

LDRH

LDRH Risk / Return Rank: 85
LDRH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
LDRH Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
LDRH Omega Ratio Rank: 81
LDRH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
LDRH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

HYGW vs. LDRH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) and iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH). 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.

	HYGW	LDRH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	2.43	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.51	3.92	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.48	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.69	5.14	-1.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.88	21.43	-4.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HYGW vs. LDRH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HYGW Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is comparable to the LDRH Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HYGW and LDRH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HYGW	LDRH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.39	2.43	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.26	1.70	-0.44

Drawdowns

HYGW vs. LDRH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HYGW drawdown since its inception was -5.49%, which is greater than LDRH's maximum drawdown of -3.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HYGW and LDRH.

Drawdown Indicators

	HYGW	LDRH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.49%	-3.17%	-2.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.82%	-1.23%	-0.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.12%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-0.24%	-0.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.40%	0.30%	+0.10%

Volatility

HYGW vs. LDRH - Volatility Comparison

iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) has a higher volatility of 0.88% compared to iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF (LDRH) at 0.69%. This indicates that HYGW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LDRH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HYGW	LDRH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.88%	0.69%	+0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.22%	1.97%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81%	2.61%	+0.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.68%	3.51%	+1.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.68%	3.51%	+1.17%

HYGW vs. LDRH - Expense Ratio Comparison

HYGW has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than LDRH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

HYGW vs. LDRH - Dividend Comparison

HYGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.54%, more than LDRH's 6.99% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
HYGW iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF	11.54%	12.53%	12.30%	15.98%	8.71%
LDRH iShares iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder ETF	6.99%	6.41%	1.13%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HYGW and LDRH in my portfolio?

HYGW and LDRH have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HYGW or LDRH?

HYGW has higher volatility (0.88%) compared to LDRH (0.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HYGW dropped -5.49% vs LDRH's -3.17%.

Which ETF is better, HYGW or LDRH?

On 1-year performance, HYGW leads with 6.67% vs 6.30% for LDRH. On fees, LDRH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, LDRH has been the lower-risk option at 0.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HYGW or LDRH?

Over the 1-year period, HYGW has performed better with a 6.67% return vs 6.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HYGW or LDRH?

LDRH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for HYGW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HYGW or LDRH?

HYGW has the higher dividend yield at 11.54%, compared with 6.99% for LDRH.

What is the main difference between HYGW and LDRH?

HYGW tracks Cboe HYG BuyWrite Index, while LDRH tracks BlackRock iBonds 1-5 Year High Yield and Income Ladder Index. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for HYGW and 0.35% for LDRH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LDRH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 2.39), 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.