IGSB vs. LQD
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Short-Term Corporate Bond ETF (IGSB) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD).
IGSB and LQD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IGSB is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the ICE BofAML 1-5 Year US Corporate Index. It was launched on Jan 11, 2007. 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 IGSB 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: IGSB or LQD.
Performance
IGSB vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IGSB achieves a 4.60% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's 1.89% return. Over the past 10 years, IGSB has underperformed LQD with an annualized return of 2.17%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively higher 2.49% annualized return.
IGSB
4.60%
-0.39%
3.59%
7.36%
2.04%
2.17%
LQD
1.89%
-1.51%
3.50%
8.37%
0.17%
2.49%
Key characteristics
| IGSB | LQD | |
|---|---|---|
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.94 | 1.19 |
| Sortino Ratio | 4.66 | 1.75 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.60 | 1.21 |
| Calmar Ratio | 2.32 | 0.51 |
| Martin Ratio | 16.87 | 4.00 |
| Ulcer Index | 0.44% | 2.20% |
| Daily Std Dev | 2.53% | 7.38% |
| Max Drawdown | -13.38% | -24.95% |
| Current Drawdown | -0.93% | -10.26% |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IGSB vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IGSB has a 0.06% 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%.
Correlation
The correlation between IGSB and LQD is 0.57, 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.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IGSB vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Short-Term Corporate Bond ETF (IGSB) 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
IGSB vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
IGSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.91%, less than LQD's 4.39% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGSB iShares Short-Term Corporate Bond ETF | 3.91% | 3.26% | 2.07% | 1.82% | 2.37% | 3.07% | 2.46% | 1.65% | 1.45% | 1.18% | 0.94% | 1.17% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.39% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% | 3.39% | 3.83% |
Drawdowns
IGSB vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IGSB drawdown since its inception was -13.38%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGSB and LQD. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IGSB vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Short-Term Corporate Bond ETF (IGSB) is 0.66%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 2.31%. This indicates that IGSB 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.