ITB vs. LQD
ITB (iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ITB is a Building & Construction fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ITB returned 13.61%/yr vs 2.41%/yr for LQD. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ITB charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
ITB vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ITB achieves a -3.71% return, which is significantly lower than LQD's -0.06% return. Over the past 10 years, ITB has outperformed LQD with an annualized return of 13.61%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively lower 2.41% annualized return.
ITB
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- -0.48%
- YTD
- -3.71%
- 6M
- -7.66%
- 1Y
- 3.31%
- 3Y*
- 6.44%
- 5Y*
- 6.84%
- 10Y*
- 13.61%
LQD
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- -0.06%
- 6M
- -0.06%
- 1Y
- 5.73%
- 3Y*
- 4.95%
- 5Y*
- -0.28%
- 10Y*
- 2.41%
ITB vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | -3.71% | -5.26% | 2.06% | 68.91% | -26.26% | 49.25% | 26.42% | 48.70% | -30.92% | 59.65% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -0.06% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -3.79% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between ITB and LQD is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2006 | 0.14 |
Over the past year, ITB and LQD have become more correlated (0.49) than their long-term average of 0.14, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
ITB vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
ITB
LQD
ITB vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) 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.
| ITB | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.19 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.13 | 1.72 | -1.60 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.25 | 4.88 | -4.64 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ITB | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.11 | 1.08 | -0.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | -0.03 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 | 0.28 | +0.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.11 | 0.54 | -0.43 |
Drawdowns
ITB vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ITB drawdown since its inception was -86.53%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITB and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ITB | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.53% | -24.95% | -61.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.04% | -3.34% | -22.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.35% | -8.43% | -24.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.55% | -24.95% | -15.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.10% | -24.95% | -27.15% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.00% | -4.21% | -22.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -37.10% | -3.99% | -33.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.28% | 1.18% | +12.10% |
Volatility
ITB vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) has a higher volatility of 7.16% compared to iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) at 1.62%. This indicates that ITB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ITB | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.16% | 1.62% | +5.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.24% | 3.94% | +16.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.41% | 5.32% | +24.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.19% | 8.65% | +20.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.00% | 8.68% | +21.32% |
ITB vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
ITB has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
ITB vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
ITB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than LQD's 4.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | 1.23% | 1.67% | 0.46% | 0.48% | 0.86% | 0.37% | 0.46% | 0.50% | 0.63% | 0.28% | 0.43% | 0.34% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.59% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ITB and LQD have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ITB has higher volatility (7.16%) compared to LQD (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITB dropped -86.53% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 10-year performance, ITB leads with 13.61% vs 2.41% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LQD has been the lower-risk option at 1.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ITB has performed better with a 13.61% return vs 2.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for ITB.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 1.23% for ITB.
ITB is categorized as Building & Construction, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for ITB and 0.15% for LQD.
LQD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs 0.11), 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.
Find the right allocation for ITB and LQD
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