SLQD vs. AOM
SLQD (iShares 0-5 Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SLQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Markit iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade 0-5 Index, while AOM is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Moderate. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SLQD returned 2.60%/yr vs 5.98%/yr for AOM. Their 0.34 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SLQD charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AOM.
Performance
SLQD vs. AOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SLQD achieves a 1.10% return, which is significantly lower than AOM's 4.36% return. Over the past 10 years, SLQD has underperformed AOM with an annualized return of 2.60%, while AOM has yielded a comparatively higher 5.98% annualized return.
SLQD
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 1.10%
- 1Y
- 3.24%
- 3Y*
- 5.31%
- 5Y*
- 2.53%
- 10Y*
- 2.60%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.50%
AOM
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.55%
- 6M
- 2.85%
- YTD
- 4.36%
- 1Y
- 10.81%
- 3Y*
- 9.93%
- 5Y*
- 4.40%
- 10Y*
- 5.98%
- ALL TIME*
- 7.02%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.08M | $6.99M | $7.49M | |
| $10.60M | $10.54M | $10.26M |
SLQD vs. AOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SLQD iShares 0-5 Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 1.10% | 6.27% | 4.94% | 5.98% | -4.38% | -0.61% | 4.76% | 6.09% | 1.09% | 2.12% |
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 4.36% | 13.28% | 7.95% | 12.38% | -14.54% | 6.93% | 10.02% | 15.58% | -3.88% | 11.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between SLQD and AOM is 0.57, 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. | 0.57 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.57 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2013 | 0.34 |
Over the past year, SLQD and AOM have become more correlated (0.57) than their long-term average of 0.34, 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
SLQD vs. AOM — Risk / Return Rank
SLQD
AOM
SLQD vs. AOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares 0-5 Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (SLQD) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). 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.
| SLQD | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.28 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.50 | 2.08 | +1.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.40 | 8.68 | +6.73 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SLQD vs. AOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SLQD drawdown since its inception was -12.69%, smaller than the maximum AOM drawdown of -19.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLQD and AOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SLQD | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.69% | -19.96% | +7.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.06% | -5.11% | +4.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.06% | -6.54% | +5.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -7.60% | -19.96% | +12.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -12.69% | -19.96% | +7.27% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -1.07% | +0.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.86% | -2.68% | +1.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.24% | 1.22% | -0.98% |
Volatility
SLQD vs. AOM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares 0-5 Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (SLQD) is 0.42%, while iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) has a volatility of 2.14%. This indicates that SLQD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SLQD | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 2.14% | -1.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.24% | 5.90% | -4.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.54% | 7.06% | -5.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.45% | 8.25% | -5.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.13% | 7.95% | -4.82% |
SLQD vs. AOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
SLQD has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than AOM's 0.25% 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
SLQD vs. AOM - Dividend Comparison
SLQD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, more than AOM's 3.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 3.09% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
SLQD iShares 0-5 Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 3.99% | 4.15% | 3.71% | 2.99% | 2.00% | 1.67% | 2.34% | 2.89% | 2.55% | 1.98% | 1.81% | 1.43% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SLQD and AOM have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AOM has higher volatility (2.14%) compared to SLQD (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SLQD dropped -12.69% vs AOM's -19.96%.
On 10-year performance, AOM leads with 5.98% vs 2.60% for SLQD. On fees, SLQD is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, SLQD has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, AOM has performed better with a 5.98% return vs 2.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SLQD is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AOM.
SLQD has the higher dividend yield at 3.99%, compared with 3.09% for AOM.
SLQD is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while AOM is Diversified Portfolio. SLQD tracks Markit iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade 0-5 Index, while AOM tracks S&P Target Risk Moderate. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for SLQD and 0.25% for AOM.
SLQD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.50), 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 SLQD and AOM
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