LQDW vs. FLOT
LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) and FLOT (iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index, while FLOT is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LQDW returned 3.70%/yr vs 5.59%/yr for FLOT. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LQDW charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLOT.
Performance
LQDW vs. FLOT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDW achieves a 1.88% return, which is significantly lower than FLOT's 2.01% return.
LQDW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.36%
- YTD
- 1.88%
- 6M
- 2.02%
- 1Y
- 6.49%
- 3Y*
- 3.70%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLOT
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 2.01%
- 6M
- 2.15%
- 1Y
- 4.74%
- 3Y*
- 5.59%
- 5Y*
- 4.22%
- 10Y*
- 3.04%
LQDW vs. FLOT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 1.88% | 9.05% | 2.60% | 3.99% | -6.78% |
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 2.01% | 4.91% | 6.53% | 6.43% | 1.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDW and FLOT is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2022 | 0.16 |
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
LQDW vs. FLOT — Risk / Return Rank
LQDW
FLOT
LQDW vs. FLOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW) and iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT). 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.
| LQDW | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -8.92 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 3.11 | -1.74 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.52 | 11.03 | -8.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.34 | 102.10 | -92.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQDW vs. FLOT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDW drawdown since its inception was -9.20%, smaller than the maximum FLOT drawdown of -13.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDW and FLOT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDW | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.20% | -13.54% | +4.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.59% | -0.43% | -2.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.74% | -1.57% | -5.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -2.36% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -13.54% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | -0.02% | -0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -0.21% | -2.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.70% | 0.05% | +0.65% |
Volatility
LQDW vs. FLOT - Volatility Comparison
iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW) has a higher volatility of 1.00% compared to iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT) at 0.21%. This indicates that LQDW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDW | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.00% | 0.21% | +0.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.12% | 0.63% | +2.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.62% | 0.75% | +2.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.47% | 1.78% | +3.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.47% | 4.15% | +1.32% |
LQDW vs. FLOT - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDW has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than FLOT's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQDW vs. FLOT - Dividend Comparison
LQDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.49%, more than FLOT's 4.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 4.53% | 4.84% | 5.82% | 5.66% | 2.06% | 0.43% | 1.25% | 2.78% | 2.41% | 1.46% | 0.97% | 0.53% |
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.49% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDW and FLOT have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQDW has higher volatility (1.00%) compared to FLOT (0.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDW dropped -9.20% vs FLOT's -13.54%.
On 3-year performance, FLOT leads with 5.59% vs 3.70% for LQDW. On fees, FLOT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLOT has been the lower-risk option at 0.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FLOT has performed better with a 5.59% return vs 3.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLOT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.49%, compared with 4.53% for FLOT.
LQDW is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while FLOT is Ultrashort Bond. LQDW tracks CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index, while FLOT tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for LQDW and 0.15% for FLOT.
FLOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.36 vs 1.80), 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 LQDW and FLOT
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