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

Performance

IDTM.L vs. LQDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDTM.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, IDTM.L achieves a -1.47% return, which is significantly lower than LQDA.L's 0.02% return.


IDTM.L

1D
0.21%
1M
-0.61%
YTD
-1.47%
6M
-1.11%
1Y
2.78%
3Y*
2.49%
5Y*
33.73%
10Y*
23.02%

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)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IDTM.L
iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
-1.47%7.33%1.12%2.88%116.97%187.86%9.38%8.43%-0.05%-0.31%
LQDA.L
iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)
0.02%8.01%1.25%8.99%-17.75%-1.66%10.56%18.22%-4.30%4.45%

Correlation

The correlation between IDTM.L and LQDA.L is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.85

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

0.88

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2017

0.76

The correlation between IDTM.L and LQDA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (all time) to 0.88 (3 years), 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

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

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

IDTM.L
IDTM.L Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
IDTM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IDTM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
IDTM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
IDTM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
IDTM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDTM.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.


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

-0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.18

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.67

1.66

-0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.99

4.58

-2.59

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

The current IDTM.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.58, which is lower than the LQDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IDTM.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


IDTM.LLQDA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.58

0.98

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

-0.00

+0.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

0.28

+0.04

Drawdowns

IDTM.L vs. LQDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IDTM.L drawdown since its inception was -13.21%, smaller than the maximum LQDA.L drawdown of -25.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDTM.L and LQDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IDTM.LLQDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.21%

-25.10%

+11.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.11%

-3.32%

-0.79%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.38%

-7.86%

+0.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.21%

-25.10%

+11.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-13.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.05%

-3.58%

+0.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.31%

-6.81%

+2.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.39%

1.20%

+0.19%

Volatility

IDTM.L vs. LQDA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDTM.L) is 1.97%, while iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) has a volatility of 2.23%. This indicates that IDTM.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


IDTM.LLQDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.97%

2.23%

-0.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.48%

4.27%

-0.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.78%

5.67%

-0.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

78.73%

8.47%

+70.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

59.69%

9.11%

+50.58%

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

IDTM.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

IDTM.L vs. LQDA.L - Dividend Comparison

IDTM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.25%, while LQDA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
IDTM.L
iShares USD Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
3.25%3.11%5.23%2.48%66.26%84.42%1.24%1.92%1.82%1.49%1.45%
LQDA.L
iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IDTM.L and LQDA.L have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

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

IDTM.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while LQDA.L is Corporate Bonds. IDTM.L tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 7-10 Year Bond Index, while LQDA.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IDTM.L and 0.20% for LQDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IDTM.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