LQD vs. GBIL
LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQD returned -1.00%/yr vs 3.42%/yr for GBIL. Their 0.13 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LQD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GBIL.
Performance
LQD vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQD achieves a -1.41% return, which is significantly lower than GBIL's 1.90% return.
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%
GBIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- 6M
- 1.70%
- YTD
- 1.90%
- 1Y
- 3.77%
- 3Y*
- 4.57%
- 5Y*
- 3.42%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.30%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $51.18M | $55.98M | $72.80M | |
| $3.09B | $3.13B | $2.99B |
LQD vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 1.90% | 4.12% | 5.24% | 4.91% | 1.05% | -0.08% | 0.79% | 2.31% | 1.78% | 0.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQD and GBIL is 0.16, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2016 | 0.13 |
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
LQD vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank
LQD
GBIL
LQD vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.
| LQD | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -16.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -141.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 75.95 | -74.87 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.68 | 191.66 | -190.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.76 | 2,147.30 | -2,145.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQD vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQD drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQD and GBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQD | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.95% | -0.76% | -24.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.34% | -0.02% | -3.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.87% | -0.76% | -7.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.95% | -0.76% | -24.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.95% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.51% | 0.00% | -5.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -0.04% | -3.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.30% | 0.00% | +1.30% |
Volatility
LQD vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a higher volatility of 1.28% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.06%. This indicates that LQD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQD | GBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.28% | 0.06% | +1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.02% | 0.14% | +3.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.29% | 0.23% | +5.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.64% | 0.58% | +8.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.69% | 0.47% | +8.22% |
LQD vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
LQD vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison
LQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.65%, more than GBIL's 3.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 3.71% | 4.02% | 4.93% | 4.77% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 2.20% | 1.70% | 0.74% | 0.11% | 0.00% |
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
LQD and GBIL have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQD has higher volatility (1.28%) compared to GBIL (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQD dropped -24.95% vs GBIL's -0.76%.
On 5-year performance, GBIL leads with 3.42% vs -1.00% for LQD. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GBIL has performed better with a 3.42% return vs -1.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for LQD.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.65%, compared with 3.71% for GBIL.
LQD is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while GBIL is Government Bonds. LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while GBIL tracks FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LQD and 0.12% for GBIL.
GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.10 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 LQD and GBIL
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