PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NUSA vs. LQDI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NUSA vs. LQDI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) and iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUSA achieves a 0.39% return, which is significantly lower than LQDI's 1.72% return.


NUSA

1D
0.00%
1M
0.22%
YTD
0.39%
6M
0.55%
1Y
3.68%
3Y*
4.34%
5Y*
1.51%
10Y*

LQDI

1D
-0.39%
1M
0.66%
YTD
1.72%
6M
1.56%
1Y
7.30%
3Y*
5.84%
5Y*
1.93%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NUSA vs. LQDI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
NUSA
Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF
0.39%5.89%3.52%5.19%-5.91%-1.04%4.85%5.62%2.21%
LQDI
iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
1.72%8.84%1.48%8.85%-15.33%7.53%11.82%15.83%-2.07%

Correlation

The correlation between NUSA and LQDI is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.56

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

0.59

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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2018

0.50

The correlation between NUSA and LQDI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.60 - 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

NUSA vs. LQDI — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUSA
NUSA Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
NUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
NUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
NUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
NUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

LQDI
LQDI Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LQDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQDI Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
LQDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQDI Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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.

NUSA vs. LQDI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) and iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI). 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.


NUSALQDIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.55

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.26

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.88

2.54

+0.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.19

7.71

+2.48

NUSA vs. LQDI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUSA Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the LQDI Sharpe Ratio of 1.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUSA and LQDI, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NUSALQDIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.03

1.47

+0.55

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

0.24

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.82

0.40

+0.41

Drawdowns

NUSA vs. LQDI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUSA drawdown since its inception was -9.44%, smaller than the maximum LQDI drawdown of -28.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUSA and LQDI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NUSALQDIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.44%

-28.99%

+19.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.28%

-2.88%

+1.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.62%

-6.27%

+4.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-9.44%

-20.67%

+11.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.55%

-0.39%

-0.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.65%

-5.25%

+3.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.36%

0.95%

-0.59%

Volatility

NUSA vs. LQDI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) is 0.66%, while iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDI) has a volatility of 1.20%. This indicates that NUSA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQDI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NUSALQDIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.66%

1.20%

-0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.33%

3.44%

-2.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.82%

4.97%

-3.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.80%

8.18%

-5.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.72%

10.84%

-8.12%

NUSA vs. LQDI - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUSA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than LQDI's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

NUSA vs. LQDI - Dividend Comparison

NUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%, less than LQDI's 4.58% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
LQDI
iShares Inflation Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
4.58%4.46%4.65%3.98%3.27%2.42%2.34%3.26%2.53%0.00%
NUSA
Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF
3.86%3.83%3.93%3.54%2.44%2.16%2.51%2.85%3.22%2.20%

Frequently Asked Questions


NUSA and LQDI have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LQDI has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to NUSA (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUSA dropped -9.44% vs LQDI's -28.99%.

On 5-year performance, LQDI leads with 1.93% vs 1.51% for NUSA. On fees, NUSA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, NUSA has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. 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 1.93% return vs 1.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NUSA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for LQDI.

LQDI has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 3.86% for NUSA.

NUSA is categorized as Short-Term Bond, while LQDI is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for NUSA and 0.18% for LQDI.

NUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.47), 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 NUSA and LQDI

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