PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
LQD vs. IVV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

LQD vs. IVV

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and IVV (iShares Core S&P 500 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while IVV is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LQD returned 2.56%/yr vs 15.53%/yr for IVV. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for IVV.

Performance

LQD vs. IVV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQD achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly lower than IVV's 11.38% return. Over the past 10 years, LQD has underperformed IVV with an annualized return of 2.56%, while IVV has yielded a comparatively higher 15.53% annualized return.

LQD

1D
0.21%
1M
0.56%
YTD
0.67%
6M
0.36%
1Y
5.54%
3Y*
5.10%
5Y*
-0.00%
10Y*
2.56%

IVV

1D
0.47%
1M
4.66%
YTD
11.38%
6M
11.30%
1Y
28.64%
3Y*
22.69%
5Y*
13.99%
10Y*
15.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LQD vs. IVV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LQD
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF		0.67%7.90%0.86%9.40%-17.92%-1.84%10.97%17.37%-3.79%7.06%
IVV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF		11.38%17.85%24.93%26.31%-18.16%28.76%18.40%31.07%-4.49%21.75%

Correlation

The correlation between LQD and IVV is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.32

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 29, 2002

0.04

Over the past year, LQD and IVV have become more correlated (0.41) than their long-term average of 0.04, 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.

iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF

Often compared with LQD:
LQD vs. HYGLQD vs. VCITLQD vs. IEFLQD vs. TLTLQD vs. LQDWLQD vs. VCLTLQD vs. LQDH
Often compared with IVV:
IVV vs. VOOIVV vs. SPYIVV vs. FXAIXIVV vs. QQQIVV vs. VTIIVV vs. IOOIVV vs. CSPX.L

Return for Risk

LQD vs. IVV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
LQD
LQD Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
LQD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQD Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQD Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
LQD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQD Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank
IVV
IVV Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
IVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
IVV Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
IVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
IVV Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

LQD vs. IVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV). 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.

LQDIVVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.05
2.44

-1.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.53
3.31

-1.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.44

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.66

3.24

-1.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.76

15.05

-10.29

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LQD vs. IVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQD Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the IVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQD and IVV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

LQDIVVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.05

2.44

-1.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.00

0.83

-0.83

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.30

0.86

-0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.45

+0.09

Drawdowns

LQD vs. IVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQD drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, smaller than the maximum IVV drawdown of -55.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQD and IVV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LQDIVVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.95%

-55.25%

+30.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.34%

-8.89%

+5.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.43%

-18.75%

+10.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.95%

-24.53%

-0.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.95%

-33.90%

+8.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.51%

-0.29%

-3.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.99%

-10.78%

+6.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.17%

1.91%

-0.74%

Volatility

LQD vs. IVV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) is 1.62%, while iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) has a volatility of 2.83%. This indicates that LQD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

LQDIVVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.62%

2.83%

-1.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.90%

8.90%

-5.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.36%

11.80%

-6.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.64%

16.88%

-8.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.68%

18.05%

-9.37%

LQD vs. IVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than IVV's 0.03% 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. IVV - Dividend Comparison

LQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.56%, more than IVV's 1.06% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IVV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF		1.06%1.17%1.30%1.44%1.66%1.20%1.57%1.85%2.21%1.75%2.01%2.27%
LQD
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF		4.56%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 IVV have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IVV has higher volatility (2.83%) compared to LQD (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQD dropped -24.95% vs IVV's -55.25%.

On 10-year performance, IVV leads with 15.53% vs 2.56% for LQD. On fees, IVV is cheaper at 0.03% 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, IVV has performed better with a 15.53% return vs 2.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IVV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for LQD.

LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.56%, compared with 1.06% for IVV.

LQD is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while IVV is S&P 500. LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while IVV tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LQD and 0.03% for IVV.

IVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 1.05), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LQD and IVV

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