PCY vs. LQD
PCY (Invesco Emerging Markets Sovereign Debt ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCY is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the DB Emerging Market USD Liquid Balanced Index, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PCY returned 2.55%/yr vs 2.41%/yr for LQD. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PCY charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
PCY vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCY achieves a 1.26% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's -0.06% return. Over the past 10 years, PCY has outperformed LQD with an annualized return of 2.55%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively lower 2.41% annualized return.
PCY
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- -0.74%
- YTD
- 1.26%
- 6M
- 1.62%
- 1Y
- 13.56%
- 3Y*
- 10.81%
- 5Y*
- 0.99%
- 10Y*
- 2.55%
LQD
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- -0.06%
- 6M
- -0.06%
- 1Y
- 5.73%
- 3Y*
- 4.95%
- 5Y*
- -0.28%
- 10Y*
- 2.41%
PCY vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PCY Invesco Emerging Markets Sovereign Debt ETF | 1.26% | 16.31% | 2.55% | 18.48% | -24.47% | -4.30% | 2.29% | 17.66% | -6.16% | 9.71% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -0.06% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -3.79% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCY and LQD is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2007 | 0.45 |
Over the past year, PCY and LQD have become more correlated (0.80) than their long-term average of 0.45, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
PCY vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
PCY
LQD
PCY vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Emerging Markets Sovereign Debt ETF (PCY) 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.
| PCY | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.19 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 1.72 | +0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.34 | 4.88 | +4.45 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PCY | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.83 | 1.08 | +0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 | -0.03 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 | 0.28 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.54 | -0.24 |
Drawdowns
PCY vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCY drawdown since its inception was -49.13%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCY and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCY | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.13% | -24.95% | -24.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.91% | -3.34% | -2.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.52% | -8.43% | -3.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.17% | -24.95% | -12.22% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.78% | -24.95% | -12.83% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.23% | -4.21% | +2.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.97% | -3.99% | -2.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.46% | 1.18% | +0.28% |
Volatility
PCY vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Emerging Markets Sovereign Debt ETF (PCY) has a higher volatility of 2.20% compared to iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) at 1.62%. This indicates that PCY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCY | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.20% | 1.62% | +0.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.83% | 3.94% | +1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.46% | 5.32% | +2.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.17% | 8.65% | +4.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.95% | 8.68% | +4.27% |
PCY vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCY vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
PCY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, more than LQD's 4.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.59% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
PCY Invesco Emerging Markets Sovereign Debt ETF | 5.91% | 5.93% | 6.65% | 6.48% | 6.81% | 4.80% | 4.45% | 4.78% | 4.93% | 4.80% | 5.19% | 5.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCY and LQD have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PCY has higher volatility (2.20%) compared to LQD (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCY dropped -49.13% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 10-year performance, PCY leads with 2.55% vs 2.41% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LQD has been the lower-risk option at 1.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PCY has performed better with a 2.55% return vs 2.41%. 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 0.50% for PCY.
PCY has the higher dividend yield at 5.91%, compared with 4.59% for LQD.
PCY is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. PCY tracks DB Emerging Market USD Liquid Balanced Index, while LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PCY and 0.15% for LQD.
PCY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.08), 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 PCY 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