LQD vs. GDXJ
LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LQD returned 2.41%/yr vs 11.53%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.
Performance
LQD vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQD achieves a -0.06% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, LQD has underperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 2.41%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 11.53% annualized return.
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%
GDXJ
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- -19.25%
- YTD
- -10.70%
- 6M
- -0.52%
- 1Y
- 50.65%
- 3Y*
- 42.13%
- 5Y*
- 15.86%
- 10Y*
- 11.53%
LQD vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | -10.70% | 172.28% | 15.67% | 7.12% | -14.53% | -21.25% | 30.40% | 40.44% | -11.02% | 8.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQD and GDXJ is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2009 | 0.23 |
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. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank
LQD
GDXJ
LQD vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.
| LQD | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.20 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.72 | 1.43 | +0.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.88 | 3.72 | +1.17 |
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
| LQD | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.08 | 1.00 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.03 | 0.39 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 | 0.26 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.05 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
LQD vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQD drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQD and GDXJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQD | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.95% | -88.66% | +63.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.34% | -35.60% | +32.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.43% | -35.60% | +27.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.95% | -50.99% | +26.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.95% | -57.77% | +32.82% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.21% | -34.94% | +30.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -60.48% | +56.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.18% | 13.67% | -12.49% |
Volatility
LQD vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) is 1.62%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 17.66%. This indicates that LQD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQD | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.62% | 17.66% | -16.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.94% | 42.71% | -38.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.32% | 50.84% | -45.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.65% | 41.34% | -32.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.68% | 44.15% | -35.47% |
LQD vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQD vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison
LQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.59%, more than GDXJ's 2.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | 2.61% | 2.33% | 2.61% | 0.72% | 0.51% | 1.78% | 1.58% | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.03% | 4.78% | 0.72% |
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
LQD and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXJ has higher volatility (17.66%) compared to LQD (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQD dropped -24.95% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.
On 10-year performance, GDXJ leads with 11.53% 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, GDXJ has performed better with a 11.53% 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 0.52% for GDXJ.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 2.61% for GDXJ.
LQD is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while GDXJ is Gold. LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LQD and 0.52% for GDXJ.
LQD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs 1.00), 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 GDXJ
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