PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LQDI vs. BINC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LQDI vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQDI achieves a 1.72% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 0.90% return.


LQDI

1D
-0.39%
1M
0.66%
YTD
1.72%
6M
1.56%
1Y
7.30%
3Y*
5.84%
5Y*
1.93%
10Y*

BINC

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.54%
YTD
0.90%
6M
1.22%
1Y
5.80%
3Y*
7.02%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LQDI vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
LQDI
iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
1.72%8.84%1.48%5.79%
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
0.90%7.57%5.76%7.08%

Correlation

The correlation between LQDI and BINC is 0.67, 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

0.67

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2023

0.71

The correlation between LQDI and BINC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

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. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQDI
LQDI Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LQDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQDI Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
LQDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQDI Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

BINC
BINC Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LQDI vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.


LQDIBINCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.51

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.54

2.17

+0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.71

8.53

-0.83

LQDI vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQDI Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is lower than the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQDI and BINC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LQDIBINCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.47

2.56

-1.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

2.36

-1.96

Drawdowns

LQDI vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQDI drawdown since its inception was -28.99%, which is greater than BINC's maximum drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDI and BINC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LQDIBINCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.99%

-2.69%

-26.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.88%

-2.69%

-0.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.27%

-2.69%

-3.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.39%

-0.49%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.25%

-0.36%

-4.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.95%

0.68%

+0.27%

Volatility

LQDI vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) at 0.75%. This indicates that LQDI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LQDIBINCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.20%

0.75%

+0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.44%

1.84%

+1.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.97%

2.28%

+2.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.18%

3.00%

+5.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.84%

3.00%

+7.84%

LQDI vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQDI has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

LQDI vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

LQDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, less than BINC's 5.86% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
5.86%5.86%6.14%3.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions


LQDI and BINC have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LQDI has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to BINC (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDI dropped -28.99% vs BINC's -2.69%.

On 3-year performance, BINC leads with 7.02% vs 5.84% for LQDI. On fees, LQDI is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BINC has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, BINC has performed better with a 7.02% return vs 5.84%. 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 0.40% for BINC.

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 4.58% for LQDI.

LQDI is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while BINC is Multisector Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for LQDI and 0.40% for BINC.

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LQDI and BINC

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