LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L
LQDA.L (iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)) and CSPX.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDA.L is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD, while CSPX.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDA.L returned -0.01%/yr vs 13.72%/yr for CSPX.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQDA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSPX.L.
Performance
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDA.L achieves a 0.02% return, which is significantly lower than CSPX.L's 10.32% 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*
- —
CSPX.L
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 4.51%
- YTD
- 10.32%
- 6M
- 11.15%
- 1Y
- 27.85%
- 3Y*
- 22.17%
- 5Y*
- 13.72%
- 10Y*
- 15.22%
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.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% | 4.45% |
CSPX.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 10.32% | 17.45% | 25.25% | 26.74% | -18.72% | 29.35% | 17.62% | 30.55% | -5.46% | 16.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDA.L and CSPX.L is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2017 | 0.21 |
Over the past year, LQDA.L and CSPX.L have become more correlated (0.44) than their long-term average of 0.21, 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.
Return for Risk
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L — Risk / Return Rank
LQDA.L
CSPX.L
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.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 Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSPX.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 | CSPX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.42 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.66 | 3.35 | -1.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.58 | 14.51 | -9.93 |
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
| LQDA.L | CSPX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 | 2.32 | -1.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.00 | 0.86 | -0.86 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.94 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.28 | 0.94 | -0.66 |
Drawdowns
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDA.L drawdown since its inception was -25.10%, smaller than the maximum CSPX.L drawdown of -33.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDA.L and CSPX.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDA.L | CSPX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.10% | -33.90% | +8.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.32% | -8.17% | +4.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.86% | -18.50% | +10.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.10% | -24.39% | -0.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.58% | -0.53% | -3.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.81% | -3.72% | -3.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.20% | 1.90% | -0.70% |
Volatility
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares USD Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (LQDA.L) is 2.23%, while iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSPX.L) has a volatility of 3.13%. This indicates that LQDA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CSPX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDA.L | CSPX.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.23% | 3.13% | -0.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.27% | 8.70% | -4.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.67% | 11.80% | -6.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.47% | 15.97% | -7.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.11% | 16.19% | -7.08% |
LQDA.L vs. CSPX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CSPX.L's 0.07% 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. CSPX.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LQDA.L nor CSPX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDA.L and CSPX.L have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSPX.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSPX.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LQDA.L.
LQDA.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while CSPX.L is S&P 500. LQDA.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD, while CSPX.L tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LQDA.L and 0.07% for CSPX.L.
Find the right allocation for LQDA.L and CSPX.L
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