IBDQ vs. LQD
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF (IBDQ) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD).
IBDQ and LQD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IBDQ is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg December 2025 Maturity Corporate. It was launched on Mar 12, 2015. 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 IBDQ 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.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: IBDQ or LQD.
Key characteristics
| IBDQ | LQD | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 4.41% | 2.62% |
| 1Y Return | 6.51% | 11.39% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 0.91% | -3.06% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 2.23% | 0.54% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 5.29 | 1.57 |
| Sortino Ratio | 9.30 | 2.31 |
| Omega Ratio | 2.59 | 1.27 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.43 | 0.61 |
| Martin Ratio | 83.80 | 5.69 |
| Ulcer Index | 0.08% | 2.10% |
| Daily Std Dev | 1.22% | 7.62% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.19% | -24.95% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | -9.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBDQ and LQD is 0.63, 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.
Performance
IBDQ vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, IBDQ achieves a 4.41% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's 2.62% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IBDQ vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBDQ has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than LQD's 0.15% 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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IBDQ vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF (IBDQ) 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.
Dividends
IBDQ vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
IBDQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.76%, less than LQD's 4.36% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBDQ iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF | 3.76% | 3.27% | 2.24% | 2.06% | 2.51% | 3.21% | 3.52% | 3.28% | 3.39% | 2.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.36% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% | 3.39% | 3.83% |
Drawdowns
IBDQ vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBDQ drawdown since its inception was -15.19%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBDQ and LQD. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IBDQ vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF (IBDQ) is 0.11%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 2.47%. This indicates that IBDQ 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.