ITOT vs. LQD
ITOT (iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ITOT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P Total Market Index, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ITOT returned 14.42%/yr vs 2.06%/yr for LQD. Their 0.06 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ITOT charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
ITOT vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ITOT achieves a 9.48% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's -1.41% return. Over the past 10 years, ITOT has outperformed LQD with an annualized return of 14.42%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively lower 2.06% annualized return.
ITOT
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 0.48%
- 6M
- 7.83%
- YTD
- 9.48%
- 1Y
- 17.56%
- 3Y*
- 18.70%
- 5Y*
- 11.47%
- 10Y*
- 14.42%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.52%
LQD
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -2.65%
- 6M
- -1.99%
- YTD
- -1.41%
- 1Y
- 1.95%
- 3Y*
- 4.07%
- 5Y*
- -1.00%
- 10Y*
- 2.06%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.35%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $228.53M | $259.55M | $322.53M | |
| $3.09B | $3.13B | $2.99B |
ITOT vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITOT iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF | 9.48% | 17.00% | 23.80% | 26.12% | -19.47% | 25.68% | 20.71% | 30.67% | -5.33% | 21.37% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -1.41% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -3.79% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between ITOT and LQD is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.34 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 23, 2004 | 0.06 |
Over the past year, ITOT and LQD have become more correlated (0.42) than their long-term average of 0.06, 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
ITOT vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
ITOT
LQD
ITOT vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ITOT | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.08 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.04 | 0.68 | +1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.79 | 1.76 | +7.03 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ITOT vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ITOT drawdown since its inception was -55.20%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITOT and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ITOT | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.20% | -24.95% | -30.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.90% | -3.34% | -5.56% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.44% | -7.87% | -11.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.36% | -24.95% | -0.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.00% | -24.95% | -10.05% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.31% | -5.51% | +3.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.94% | -3.99% | -2.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | 1.30% | +0.76% |
Volatility
ITOT vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) has a higher volatility of 3.06% compared to iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) at 1.28%. This indicates that ITOT'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
| ITOT | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.06% | 1.28% | +1.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.02% | 4.02% | +6.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.94% | 5.29% | +7.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.44% | 8.64% | +8.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.25% | 8.69% | +9.56% |
ITOT vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
ITOT has a 0.03% 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%.
Dividends
ITOT vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
ITOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, less than LQD's 4.65% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITOT iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF | 1.02% | 1.11% | 1.23% | 1.47% | 1.66% | 1.18% | 1.41% | 1.88% | 2.14% | 1.69% | 1.83% | 2.01% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.65% | 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
ITOT and LQD have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ITOT has higher volatility (3.06%) compared to LQD (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITOT dropped -55.20% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 10-year performance, ITOT leads with 14.42% vs 2.06% for LQD. On fees, ITOT is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, LQD has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ITOT has performed better with a 14.42% return vs 2.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ITOT is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for LQD.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.65%, compared with 1.02% for ITOT.
ITOT is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. ITOT tracks S&P Total Market Index, while LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for ITOT and 0.15% for LQD.
ITOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 0.43), 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 ITOT 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