LQDW vs. TLT
LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) and TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LQDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index, while TLT is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LQDW returned 3.14%/yr vs -1.80%/yr for TLT. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LQDW charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TLT.
Performance
LQDW vs. TLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LQDW achieves a 0.40% return, which is significantly higher than TLT's -3.49% return.
LQDW
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -1.66%
- 6M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- 0.40%
- 1Y
- 3.34%
- 3Y*
- 3.14%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.19%
TLT
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- -3.81%
- 6M
- -3.46%
- YTD
- -3.49%
- 1Y
- -2.45%
- 3Y*
- -1.80%
- 5Y*
- -8.18%
- 10Y*
- -2.38%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.47%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $6.26M | $3.68M | $2.25M | |
| $2.33B | $2.02B | $2.19B |
LQDW vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 0.40% | 9.05% | 2.60% | 3.99% | -6.78% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | -3.49% | 4.25% | -8.05% | 2.77% | -10.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between LQDW and TLT is 0.76, 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. | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2022 | 0.73 |
The correlation between LQDW and TLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - 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
LQDW vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank
LQDW
TLT
LQDW vs. TLT - 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 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). 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 | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 0.99 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.32 | -0.14 | +1.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.31 | -0.30 | +4.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LQDW vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LQDW drawdown since its inception was -9.20%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQDW and TLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LQDW | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.20% | -48.35% | +39.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.59% | -7.74% | +5.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.68% | -14.79% | +9.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -43.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -48.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.90% | -42.36% | +40.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.28% | -13.99% | +11.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.80% | 3.57% | -2.77% |
Volatility
LQDW vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW) is 1.17%, while iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) has a volatility of 2.46%. This indicates that LQDW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LQDW | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.17% | 2.46% | -1.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.28% | 6.85% | -3.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.77% | 9.32% | -5.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.43% | 15.74% | -10.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.43% | 14.83% | -9.40% |
LQDW vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
LQDW has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than TLT's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
LQDW vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison
LQDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.34%, more than TLT's 4.75% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.34% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | 4.34% | 4.43% | 4.30% | 3.38% | 2.67% | 1.50% | 1.50% | 2.27% | 2.63% | 2.43% | 2.60% | 2.61% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LQDW and TLT have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TLT has higher volatility (2.46%) compared to LQDW (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQDW dropped -9.20% vs TLT's -48.35%.
On 3-year performance, LQDW leads with 3.14% vs -1.80% for TLT. On fees, TLT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LQDW has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, LQDW has performed better with a 3.14% return vs -1.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TLT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.34%, compared with 4.34% for TLT.
LQDW is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while TLT is Government Bonds. LQDW tracks CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index, while TLT tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for LQDW and 0.15% for TLT.
LQDW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs -0.11), 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 TLT
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