PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MMIN vs. LQD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MMIN vs. LQD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMIN achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's 0.61% return.


MMIN

1D
0.25%
1M
1.86%
YTD
2.70%
6M
2.80%
1Y
8.72%
3Y*
3.97%
5Y*
0.81%
10Y*

LQD

1D
-0.27%
1M
0.76%
YTD
0.61%
6M
0.68%
1Y
5.23%
3Y*
4.88%
5Y*
-0.24%
10Y*
2.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MMIN vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MMIN
IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF
2.70%4.65%0.93%7.45%-11.20%1.35%7.47%8.08%1.97%1.00%
LQD
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
0.61%7.90%0.86%9.40%-17.92%-1.84%10.97%17.37%-3.79%0.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MMIN and LQD is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.46

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.66

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2017

0.51

The correlation between MMIN and LQD shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.66 (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

MMIN vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MMIN
MMIN Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
MMIN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMIN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMIN Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
MMIN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMIN Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

LQD
LQD Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
LQD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQD Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQD Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
LQD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQD Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MMIN vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) 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.


MMINLQDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.17

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.05

1.57

+1.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.19

4.40

+6.79

MMIN vs. LQD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMIN Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is higher than the LQD Sharpe Ratio of 0.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMIN and LQD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MMIN vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMIN drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMIN and LQD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MMINLQDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.87%

-24.95%

+8.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.87%

-3.34%

+0.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.22%

-8.43%

+1.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.87%

-24.95%

+8.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.58%

+3.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.30%

-3.99%

-0.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.78%

1.19%

-0.41%

Volatility

MMIN vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF (MMIN) is 0.81%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 1.43%. This indicates that MMIN 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


MMINLQDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.81%

1.43%

-0.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.49%

3.99%

-1.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.70%

5.33%

-1.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.02%

8.65%

-3.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.96%

8.69%

-1.73%

MMIN vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMIN has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

MMIN vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison

MMIN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.11%, less than LQD's 4.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
MMIN
IQ MacKay Municipal Insured ETF
4.11%4.07%3.96%3.73%2.93%1.72%2.21%2.75%2.78%0.47%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MMIN and LQD have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LQD has higher volatility (1.43%) compared to MMIN (0.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMIN dropped -16.87% vs LQD's -24.95%.

On 5-year performance, MMIN leads with 0.81% vs -0.24% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MMIN has been the lower-risk option at 0.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MMIN has performed better with a 0.81% return vs -0.24%. 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 0.31% for MMIN.

LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.56%, compared with 4.11% for MMIN.

MMIN is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. MMIN tracks Bloomberg Barclays Municipal All Insured Bond Index, while LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.31% for MMIN and 0.15% for LQD.

MMIN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 0.99), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MMIN 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