LQDI vs. LQD
LQDI (iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDI is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by iShares, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. LQDI is actively managed, while LQD is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDI returned 1.73%/yr vs -0.25%/yr for LQD. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LQDI charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
LQDI vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDI achieves a 1.33% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's 0.73% return.
LQDI
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 1.56%
- 1Y
- 5.72%
- 3Y*
- 5.41%
- 5Y*
- 1.73%
- 10Y*
- —
LQD
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.88%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- 5.10%
- 3Y*
- 4.92%
- 5Y*
- -0.25%
- 10Y*
- 2.48%
LQDI vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | 1.33% | 8.84% | 1.48% | 8.85% | -15.33% | 7.53% | 11.82% | 15.83% | -2.07% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.73% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | 1.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDI and LQD is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2018 | 0.71 |
The correlation between LQDI and LQD shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (all time) to 0.82 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
LQDI
LQD
LQDI vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| LQDI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.17 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.99 | 1.53 | +0.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.96 | 4.28 | +1.68 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQDI vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDI drawdown since its inception was -28.99%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDI and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.99% | -24.95% | -4.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.88% | -3.34% | +0.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.27% | -8.43% | +2.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.67% | -24.95% | +4.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.95% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | -3.46% | +2.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.22% | -3.99% | -1.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.96% | 1.19% | -0.23% |
Volatility
LQDI vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) is 1.20%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 1.42%. This indicates that LQDI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDI | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 1.42% | -0.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.48% | 3.98% | -0.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.96% | 5.32% | -0.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.14% | 8.65% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.81% | 8.69% | +2.12% |
LQDI vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDI has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% 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
LQDI vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
LQDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%, which matches LQD's 4.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.56% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | 4.60% | 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 LQD have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQD has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to LQDI (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDI dropped -28.99% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 5-year performance, LQDI leads with 1.73% vs -0.25% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% 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, LQDI has performed better with a 1.73% return vs -0.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for LQDI.
LQDI has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 4.56% for LQD.
LQDI is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for LQDI and 0.15% for LQD.
LQDI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.16 vs 0.96), 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 LQD
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