PCS vs. LQDW
PCS (PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF) and LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds. PCS is actively managed, while LQDW is passively managed. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCS charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for LQDW.
Performance
PCS vs. LQDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCS achieves a 1.39% return, which is significantly higher than LQDW's 1.20% return.
PCS
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.03%
- 6M
- 1.37%
- YTD
- 1.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LQDW
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- -0.38%
- 6M
- 0.83%
- YTD
- 1.20%
- 1Y
- 5.19%
- 3Y*
- 3.48%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PCS vs. LQDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PCS PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF | 1.39% | 2.22% |
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 1.20% | 3.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCS and LQDW is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025 | 0.72 |
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
PCS vs. LQDW — Risk / Return Rank
PCS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LQDW
PCS vs. LQDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF (PCS) and iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW). 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.
| PCS | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.27 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.95 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.14 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PCS vs. LQDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCS drawdown since its inception was -1.12%, smaller than the maximum LQDW drawdown of -9.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCS and LQDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCS | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -9.20% | +8.08% |
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 | -0.24% | -1.12% | +0.88% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.13% | -2.29% | +2.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.71% | — |
Volatility
PCS vs. LQDW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCS | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.98% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.19% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59% | 3.67% | -2.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.59% | 5.45% | -3.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.59% | 5.45% | -3.86% |
PCS vs. LQDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCS has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than LQDW's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCS vs. LQDW - Dividend Comparison
PCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.38%, less than LQDW's 12.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.24% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% |
PCS PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF | 4.38% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCS and LQDW have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PCS is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PCS is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.24%, compared with 4.38% for PCS.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for PCS and 0.34% for LQDW.
Find the right allocation for PCS and LQDW
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