PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LQD vs. MCHI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LQD vs. MCHI - 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 MSCI China ETF (MCHI). 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 0.82% return, which is significantly higher than MCHI's -8.72% return. Over the past 10 years, LQD has underperformed MCHI with an annualized return of 2.54%, while MCHI has yielded a comparatively higher 4.76% annualized return.


LQD

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.80%
YTD
0.82%
6M
1.24%
1Y
5.80%
3Y*
5.30%
5Y*
-0.21%
10Y*
2.54%

MCHI

1D
0.90%
1M
-5.63%
YTD
-8.72%
6M
-9.79%
1Y
2.33%
3Y*
8.42%
5Y*
-5.82%
10Y*
4.76%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LQD vs. MCHI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LQD
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
0.82%7.90%0.86%9.40%-17.92%-1.84%10.97%17.37%-3.79%7.06%
MCHI
iShares MSCI China ETF
-8.72%31.04%17.73%-11.94%-23.01%-21.74%27.78%23.72%-19.79%54.67%

Correlation

The correlation between LQD and MCHI is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.22

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

0.18

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

0.14

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

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2011

0.06

The correlation between LQD and MCHI shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. MCHI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LQD
LQD Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
LQD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQD Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
LQD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQD Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

MCHI
MCHI Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
MCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
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. MCHI - 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 MSCI China ETF (MCHI). 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.


LQDMCHIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.02

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.55

0.03

+1.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.37

0.05

+4.32

LQD vs. MCHI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQD Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is higher than the MCHI Sharpe Ratio of 0.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQD and MCHI, 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...

Drawdowns

LQD vs. MCHI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQD drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, smaller than the maximum MCHI drawdown of -62.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQD and MCHI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LQDMCHIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.95%

-62.95%

+38.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.34%

-18.51%

+15.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.43%

-25.85%

+17.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.95%

-56.98%

+32.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.95%

-62.95%

+38.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.37%

-37.76%

+34.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.99%

-24.54%

+20.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.19%

8.81%

-7.62%

Volatility

LQD vs. MCHI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) is 1.78%, while iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI) has a volatility of 6.46%. This indicates that LQD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LQDMCHIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.78%

6.46%

-4.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.02%

14.62%

-10.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.37%

20.23%

-14.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.65%

30.72%

-22.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.69%

27.38%

-18.69%

LQD vs. MCHI - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHI's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

LQD vs. MCHI - Dividend Comparison

LQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.55%, more than MCHI's 2.32% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LQD
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
4.55%4.48%4.45%3.99%3.30%2.30%2.66%3.29%3.67%3.10%3.34%3.47%
MCHI
iShares MSCI China ETF
2.32%2.12%2.31%2.66%1.78%1.04%1.04%1.45%1.60%1.56%1.66%2.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


LQD and MCHI have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCHI has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to LQD (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQD dropped -24.95% vs MCHI's -62.95%.

On 10-year performance, MCHI leads with 4.76% vs 2.54% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LQD has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MCHI has performed better with a 4.76% return vs 2.54%. 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 0.59% for MCHI.

LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.55%, compared with 2.32% for MCHI.

LQD is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while MCHI is China Equities. LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, while MCHI tracks MSCI China Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LQD and 0.59% for MCHI.

LQD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.97 vs 0.02), 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 MCHI

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