LQDB vs. FLRN
LQDB (iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF) and FLRN (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds - LQDB tracks the iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index while FLRN tracks the Bloomberg US Floating Rate Notes (<5 Y). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDB returned 0.84%/yr vs 4.19%/yr for FLRN. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.
Performance
LQDB vs. FLRN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDB achieves a 0.77% return, which is significantly lower than FLRN's 1.87% return.
LQDB
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 0.77%
- 6M
- 0.56%
- 1Y
- 5.96%
- 3Y*
- 5.59%
- 5Y*
- 0.84%
- 10Y*
- —
FLRN
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.45%
- YTD
- 1.87%
- 6M
- 2.19%
- 1Y
- 4.88%
- 3Y*
- 5.67%
- 5Y*
- 4.19%
- 10Y*
- 3.03%
LQDB vs. FLRN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 0.77% | 7.50% | 2.37% | 9.60% | -15.51% | 2.35% |
FLRN SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 1.87% | 5.01% | 6.32% | 6.54% | 1.31% | 0.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDB and FLRN is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2021 | 0.10 |
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
LQDB vs. FLRN — Risk / Return Rank
LQDB
FLRN
LQDB vs. FLRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLRN). 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.
| LQDB | FLRN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -11.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 3.44 | -2.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 21.54 | -19.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.94 | 130.06 | -123.12 |
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
| LQDB | FLRN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.47 | 7.18 | -5.71 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.12 | 2.50 | -2.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.72 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.50 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
LQDB vs. FLRN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDB drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, which is greater than FLRN's maximum drawdown of -14.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDB and FLRN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDB | FLRN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.63% | -14.64% | -6.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.67% | -0.23% | -2.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.90% | -1.43% | -4.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.63% | -2.16% | -19.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | 0.00% | -0.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.93% | -1.83% | -6.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.86% | 0.04% | +0.82% |
Volatility
LQDB vs. FLRN - Volatility Comparison
iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) has a higher volatility of 1.31% compared to SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLRN) at 0.15%. This indicates that LQDB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDB | FLRN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.31% | 0.15% | +1.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.08% | 0.52% | +2.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.07% | 0.68% | +3.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.87% | 1.69% | +5.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.85% | 4.20% | +2.65% |
LQDB vs. FLRN - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both LQDB and FLRN 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
LQDB vs. FLRN - Dividend Comparison
LQDB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, more than FLRN's 4.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLRN SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 4.51% | 4.89% | 5.67% | 5.68% | 1.95% | 0.39% | 1.22% | 2.76% | 2.39% | 1.64% | 1.06% | 0.63% |
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 4.70% | 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
LQDB and FLRN have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQDB has higher volatility (1.31%) compared to FLRN (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDB dropped -21.63% vs FLRN's -14.64%.
On 5-year performance, FLRN leads with 4.19% vs 0.84% for LQDB. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, FLRN has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLRN has performed better with a 4.19% return vs 0.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQDB and FLRN have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.
LQDB has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 4.51% for FLRN.
LQDB tracks iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index , while FLRN tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Notes (<5 Y). They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street.
FLRN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.18 vs 1.47), 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 LQDB and FLRN
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