LQDW vs. PCL
LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) and PCL (PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds. LQDW is passively managed, while PCL is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LQDW charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for PCL.
Performance
LQDW vs. PCL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDW achieves a 1.70% return, which is significantly lower than PCL's 1.88% return.
LQDW
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- 1.18%
- YTD
- 1.70%
- 6M
- 1.70%
- 1Y
- 6.47%
- 3Y*
- 3.64%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PCL
- 1D
- -0.41%
- 1M
- 1.39%
- YTD
- 1.88%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQDW vs. PCL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 1.70% | 3.00% |
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF | 1.88% | 2.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDW and PCL is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025 | 0.83 |
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. PCL — Risk / Return Rank
LQDW
PCL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LQDW vs. PCL - 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 PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF (PCL). 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 | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.51 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.31 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQDW vs. PCL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDW drawdown since its inception was -9.20%, which is greater than PCL's maximum drawdown of -5.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDW and PCL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDW | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.20% | -5.14% | -4.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.59% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.74% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.22% | -1.08% | +0.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -1.73% | -0.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.70% | — | — |
Volatility
LQDW vs. PCL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDW | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.99% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.12% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.63% | 7.85% | -4.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.47% | 7.85% | -2.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.47% | 7.85% | -2.38% |
LQDW vs. PCL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDW has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than PCL's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQDW vs. PCL - Dividend Comparison
LQDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.52%, more than PCL's 5.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.52% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% |
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF | 5.28% | 2.52% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDW and PCL have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PCL is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PCL is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.52%, compared with 5.28% for PCL.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for LQDW and 0.25% for PCL.
Find the right allocation for LQDW and PCL
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