LQDI vs. ACWI
LQDI (iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDI is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by iShares, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. LQDI is actively managed, while ACWI is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDI returned 1.93%/yr vs 11.28%/yr for ACWI. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQDI charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.
Performance
LQDI vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDI achieves a 1.72% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.13% return.
LQDI
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 0.66%
- YTD
- 1.72%
- 6M
- 1.56%
- 1Y
- 7.30%
- 3Y*
- 5.84%
- 5Y*
- 1.93%
- 10Y*
- —
ACWI
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 5.28%
- YTD
- 12.13%
- 6M
- 12.96%
- 1Y
- 29.18%
- 3Y*
- 21.15%
- 5Y*
- 11.28%
- 10Y*
- 12.85%
LQDI vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | 1.72% | 8.84% | 1.48% | 8.85% | -15.33% | 7.53% | 11.82% | 15.83% | -2.07% |
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 12.13% | 22.41% | 17.45% | 22.27% | -18.39% | 18.66% | 16.34% | 26.59% | -10.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDI and ACWI is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2018 | 0.25 |
Over the past year, LQDI and ACWI have become more correlated (0.46) than their long-term average of 0.25, 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
LQDI vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank
LQDI
ACWI
LQDI vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.
| LQDI | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.41 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.54 | 3.01 | -0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.71 | 13.53 | -5.82 |
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
| LQDI | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.47 | 2.29 | -0.82 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | 0.71 | -0.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.75 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.40 | 0.43 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
LQDI vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDI drawdown since its inception was -28.99%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDI and ACWI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDI | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.99% | -56.00% | +27.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.88% | -9.73% | +6.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.27% | -16.55% | +10.28% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.67% | -26.42% | +5.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.53% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.39% | -0.83% | +0.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.25% | -8.61% | +3.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.95% | 2.16% | -1.21% |
Volatility
LQDI vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) is 1.20%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that LQDI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDI | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 3.93% | -2.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.44% | 10.29% | -6.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.97% | 12.78% | -7.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.18% | 16.05% | -7.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.84% | 17.11% | -6.27% |
LQDI vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDI has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQDI vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison
LQDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 1.38% | 1.55% | 1.70% | 1.88% | 1.79% | 1.71% | 1.43% | 2.33% | 2.18% | 1.94% | 2.19% | 2.56% |
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | 4.58% | 4.46% | 4.65% | 3.98% | 3.27% | 2.42% | 2.34% | 3.26% | 2.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDI and ACWI have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACWI has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to LQDI (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDI dropped -28.99% vs ACWI's -56.00%.
On 5-year performance, ACWI leads with 11.28% vs 1.93% for LQDI. On fees, LQDI is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, LQDI has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 11.28% return vs 1.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQDI is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.
LQDI has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.
LQDI is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while ACWI is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for LQDI and 0.32% for ACWI.
ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 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 LQDI and ACWI
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