LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LQDA.L (iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)) and AGGG.L (iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDA.L is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD, while AGGG.L is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDA.L returned -0.01%/yr vs -1.74%/yr for AGGG.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LQDA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for AGGG.L.

Performance

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) and iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist (AGGG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQDA.L achieves a 0.02% return, which is significantly higher than AGGG.L's -0.28% return.

LQDA.L

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 0.02%
• 6M: 0.29%
• 1Y: 5.53%
• 3Y*: 5.02%
• 5Y*: -0.01%
• 10Y*: —

AGGG.L

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: -0.28%
• 6M: 0.43%
• 1Y: 2.20%
• 3Y*: 3.42%
• 5Y*: -1.74%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LQDA.L iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)	0.02%	8.01%	1.25%	8.99%	-17.75%	-1.66%	10.56%	18.22%	-4.30%	0.69%
AGGG.L iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist	-0.28%	8.06%	-1.44%	5.27%	-15.93%	-5.32%	9.37%	6.85%	-1.17%	0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between LQDA.L and AGGG.L is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 27, 2017	0.69

The correlation between LQDA.L and AGGG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (all time) to 0.79 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQDA.L

LQDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
LQDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
LQDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
LQDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 27
LQDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
LQDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

AGGG.L

AGGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 16
AGGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
AGGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
AGGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 15
AGGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
AGGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) and iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist (AGGG.L). 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.

	LQDA.L	AGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.98	0.43	+0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.44	0.68	+0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.08	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.66	0.63	+1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	1.66	+2.92
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQDA.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is higher than the AGGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQDA.L and AGGG.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LQDA.L	AGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98	0.43	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.00	-0.26	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.05	+0.23

Drawdowns

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQDA.L drawdown since its inception was -25.10%, roughly equal to the maximum AGGG.L drawdown of -25.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDA.L and AGGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LQDA.L	AGGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.10%	-25.91%	+0.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.32%	-3.48%	+0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.86%	-7.20%	-0.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.10%	-24.24%	-0.86%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.58%	-11.01%	+7.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.81%	-9.53%	+2.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.20%	1.32%	-0.12%

Volatility

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) has a higher volatility of 2.23% compared to iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist (AGGG.L) at 1.74%. This indicates that LQDA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGGG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LQDA.L	AGGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.23%	1.74%	+0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.27%	3.91%	+0.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.67%	5.10%	+0.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.47%	6.81%	+1.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.11%	6.32%	+2.79%

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQDA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than AGGG.L's 0.10% 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

LQDA.L vs. AGGG.L - Dividend Comparison

LQDA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AGGG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AGGG.L iShares Global Aggregate Bond UCITS Dist	3.16%	2.97%	2.74%	2.01%	1.55%	1.33%	1.46%	1.62%	0.96%
LQDA.L iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LQDA.L and AGGG.L in my portfolio?

LQDA.L and AGGG.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LQDA.L or AGGG.L?

On fees, AGGG.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LQDA.L or AGGG.L?

AGGG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LQDA.L.

What is the main difference between LQDA.L and AGGG.L?

LQDA.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while AGGG.L is Global Bonds. LQDA.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD, while AGGG.L tracks Bloomberg Global Aggregate TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LQDA.L and 0.10% for AGGG.L.