LQDI vs. SCHP
LQDI (iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF) and SCHP (Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF) are both Inflation-Protected Bonds funds. LQDI is actively managed, while SCHP is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LQDI returned 0.74%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for SCHP. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LQDI charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHP.
Performance
LQDI vs. SCHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDI achieves a -0.16% return, which is significantly lower than SCHP's 0.56% return.
LQDI
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -1.50%
- 6M
- -0.46%
- YTD
- -0.16%
- 1Y
- 2.23%
- 3Y*
- 4.99%
- 5Y*
- 0.74%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.05%
SCHP
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- -0.74%
- 6M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 0.56%
- 1Y
- 1.92%
- 3Y*
- 3.81%
- 5Y*
- 0.32%
- 10Y*
- 2.41%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.72%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $224.12K | $204.54K | $225.32K | |
| $106.22M | $100.23M | $107.98M |
LQDI vs. SCHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | -0.16% | 8.84% | 1.48% | 8.85% | -15.33% | 7.53% | 11.82% | 15.83% | -2.07% |
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 0.56% | 6.76% | 1.95% | 3.91% | -12.02% | 5.87% | 10.86% | 8.52% | -0.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDI and SCHP is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2018 | 0.65 |
The correlation between LQDI and SCHP shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.78 (5 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. SCHP — Risk / Return Rank
LQDI
SCHP
LQDI vs. SCHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) and Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP). 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 | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.10 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.78 | 1.00 | -0.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.02 | 2.69 | -0.67 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQDI vs. SCHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDI drawdown since its inception was -28.99%, which is greater than SCHP's maximum drawdown of -14.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDI and SCHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDI | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.99% | -14.26% | -14.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.88% | -1.93% | -0.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.08% | -3.70% | -1.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.67% | -14.26% | -6.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.26% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.24% | -1.28% | -0.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.17% | -3.90% | -1.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.11% | 0.72% | +0.39% |
Volatility
LQDI vs. SCHP - Volatility Comparison
iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) has a higher volatility of 1.27% compared to Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP) at 0.67%. This indicates that LQDI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDI | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.27% | 0.67% | +0.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.38% | 2.45% | +0.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.88% | 3.21% | +1.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.13% | 6.11% | +2.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.75% | 5.58% | +5.17% |
LQDI vs. SCHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDI has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHP's 0.03% 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. SCHP - Dividend Comparison
LQDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.67%, less than SCHP's 5.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDI iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF | 4.67% | 4.46% | 4.65% | 3.98% | 3.27% | 2.42% | 2.34% | 3.26% | 2.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 5.04% | 4.06% | 2.99% | 3.02% | 7.19% | 4.39% | 1.11% | 2.02% | 2.26% | 1.90% | 1.38% | 0.28% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDI and SCHP have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQDI has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to SCHP (0.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDI dropped -28.99% vs SCHP's -14.26%.
On 5-year performance, LQDI leads with 0.74% vs 0.32% for SCHP. On fees, SCHP is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, SCHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.67%. 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 0.74% return vs 0.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHP is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for LQDI.
SCHP has the higher dividend yield at 5.04%, compared with 4.67% for LQDI.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for LQDI and 0.03% for SCHP.
SCHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.60 vs 0.46), 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 SCHP
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