LQDE.L vs. MLPD

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LQDE.L (iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing) and MLPD (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDE.L is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Morningstar US Corporate Bond TR USD, while MLPD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe MLPX ATM BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LQDE.L returned 5.80% vs 15.62% for MLPD. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQDE.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for MLPD.

Performance

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LQDE.L) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQDE.L achieves a 0.16% return, which is significantly lower than MLPD's 5.38% return.

LQDE.L

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 0.19%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: 0.75%
• 1Y: 5.80%
• 3Y*: 5.02%
• 5Y*: 0.00%
• 10Y*: 2.55%

MLPD

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 5.38%
• 6M: 6.27%
• 1Y: 15.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LQDE.L iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing	0.16%	8.09%	3.53%
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	5.38%	11.77%	9.42%

Correlation

The correlation between LQDE.L and MLPD is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2024	0.01

The correlation between LQDE.L and MLPD shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LQDE.L vs. MLPD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQDE.L

LQDE.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
LQDE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
LQDE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
LQDE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 26
LQDE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
LQDE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 33

MLPD

MLPD Risk / Return Rank: 67
MLPD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
MLPD Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
MLPD Omega Ratio Rank: 71
MLPD Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
MLPD Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LQDE.L) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD). 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.

	LQDE.L	MLPD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	2.11	-1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.41	2.83	-1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.40	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	3.27	-1.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.78	10.64	-5.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQDE.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the MLPD Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQDE.L and MLPD, 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

	LQDE.L	MLPD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97	2.11	-1.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	1.15	-0.74

Drawdowns

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQDE.L drawdown since its inception was -32.12%, which is greater than MLPD's maximum drawdown of -12.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDE.L and MLPD.

Drawdown Indicators

	LQDE.L	MLPD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.12%	-12.90%	-19.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.21%	-4.80%	+1.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.11%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.85%	-1.61%	-2.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.70%	-1.12%	-3.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.16%	1.47%	-0.31%

Volatility

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LQDE.L) is 2.09%, while Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD) has a volatility of 3.08%. This indicates that LQDE.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MLPD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LQDE.L	MLPD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.09%	3.08%	-0.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.32%	5.41%	-1.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.76%	7.44%	-1.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.44%	11.40%	-2.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.67%	11.40%	-2.73%

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQDE.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

LQDE.L vs. MLPD - Dividend Comparison

LQDE.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.95%, less than MLPD's 13.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LQDE.L iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD Distributing	4.95%	4.89%	5.02%	4.58%	3.74%	2.68%	2.77%	3.42%	3.69%	3.25%	3.40%	3.36%
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	13.42%	13.45%	6.68%	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 LQDE.L and MLPD in my portfolio?

LQDE.L and MLPD have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LQDE.L or MLPD?

On fees, LQDE.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LQDE.L or MLPD?

LQDE.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for MLPD.

What is the main difference between LQDE.L and MLPD?

LQDE.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while MLPD is Derivative Income. LQDE.L tracks Morningstar US Corporate Bond TR USD, while MLPD tracks Cboe MLPX ATM BuyWrite Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LQDE.L and 0.60% for MLPD.