LQD vs. LQDB
LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and LQDB (iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds from iShares - LQD tracks the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index while LQDB tracks the iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index . Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQD returned -0.25%/yr vs 0.67%/yr for LQDB. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.
Performance
LQD vs. LQDB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQD achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than LQDB's 1.04% return.
LQD
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.88%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- 5.10%
- 3Y*
- 4.92%
- 5Y*
- -0.25%
- 10Y*
- 2.48%
LQDB
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- 0.83%
- YTD
- 1.04%
- 6M
- 1.11%
- 1Y
- 5.16%
- 3Y*
- 5.56%
- 5Y*
- 0.67%
- 10Y*
- —
LQD vs. LQDB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.73% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | 3.29% |
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 1.04% | 7.50% | 2.37% | 9.60% | -15.51% | 2.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQD and LQDB is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2021 | 0.98 |
The correlation between LQD and LQDB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. LQDB — Risk / Return Rank
LQD
LQDB
LQD vs. LQDB - 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 BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB). 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 | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.22 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.53 | 1.94 | -0.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.28 | 5.91 | -1.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQD vs. LQDB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQD drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, which is greater than LQDB's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQD and LQDB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQD | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.95% | -21.63% | -3.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.34% | -2.67% | -0.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.43% | -5.90% | -2.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.95% | -21.63% | -3.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.95% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.46% | -0.57% | -2.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -7.85% | +3.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.19% | 0.87% | +0.32% |
Volatility
LQD vs. LQDB - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a higher volatility of 1.42% compared to iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) at 1.21%. This indicates that LQD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQDB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQD | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.42% | 1.21% | +0.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.98% | 3.18% | +0.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.32% | 4.07% | +1.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.65% | 6.87% | +1.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.69% | 6.83% | +1.86% |
LQD vs. LQDB - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both LQD and LQDB have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
LQD vs. LQDB - Dividend Comparison
LQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.56%, less than LQDB's 4.69% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 4.69% | 4.65% | 4.46% | 3.90% | 4.14% | 1.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, LQD and LQDB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
LQD has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to LQDB (1.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQD dropped -24.95% vs LQDB's -21.63%.
On 5-year performance, LQDB leads with 0.67% vs -0.25% for LQD. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, LQDB has been the lower-risk option at 1.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, LQDB has performed better with a 0.67% return vs -0.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQD and LQDB have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.
LQDB has the higher dividend yield at 4.69%, compared with 4.56% for LQD.
LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while LQDB tracks iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index .
LQDB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs 0.96), 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 LQDB
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