PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IB01.L vs. LQDA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares USD Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IB01.L) and iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IB01.L achieves a 1.45% return, which is significantly higher than LQDA.L's 0.02% return.


IB01.L

1D
0.03%
1M
0.28%
YTD
1.45%
6M
1.75%
1Y
3.98%
3Y*
4.73%
5Y*
3.39%
10Y*

LQDA.L

1D
0.38%
1M
0.35%
YTD
0.02%
6M
0.29%
1Y
5.53%
3Y*
5.02%
5Y*
-0.01%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IB01.L
iShares USD Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF (Acc)
1.45%4.34%5.25%4.92%1.08%0.00%0.88%2.01%
LQDA.L
iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)
0.02%8.01%1.25%8.99%-17.75%-1.66%10.56%13.76%

Correlation

The correlation between IB01.L and LQDA.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.15

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2019

0.14

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

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IB01.L
IB01.L Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
IB01.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IB01.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
IB01.L Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
IB01.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
IB01.L Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

LQDA.L
LQDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
LQDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
LQDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IB01.L) and iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L). 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.


IB01.LLQDA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+10.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+35.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

8.02

1.18

+6.84

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

115.45

1.66

+113.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

569.86

4.58

+565.28

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IB01.L Sharpe Ratio is 11.94, which is higher than the LQDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IB01.L and LQDA.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IB01.LLQDA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.94

0.98

+10.96

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

9.24

-0.00

+9.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

3.79

0.28

+3.51

Drawdowns

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IB01.L drawdown since its inception was -0.91%, smaller than the maximum LQDA.L drawdown of -25.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IB01.L and LQDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IB01.LLQDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.91%

-25.10%

+24.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.03%

-3.32%

+3.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.09%

-7.86%

+7.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.29%

-25.10%

+24.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.58%

+3.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.08%

-6.81%

+6.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.01%

1.20%

-1.19%

Volatility

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares USD Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IB01.L) is 0.10%, while iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) has a volatility of 2.23%. This indicates that IB01.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IB01.LLQDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.10%

2.23%

-2.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.24%

4.27%

-4.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33%

5.67%

-5.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.37%

8.47%

-8.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.72%

9.11%

-8.39%

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IB01.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than LQDA.L's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IB01.L vs. LQDA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IB01.L nor LQDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IB01.L and LQDA.L have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IB01.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IB01.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LQDA.L.

IB01.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while LQDA.L is Corporate Bonds. IB01.L tracks ICE U.S. Treasury Short Bond Index, while LQDA.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IB01.L and 0.20% for LQDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IB01.L and LQDA.L

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