PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SWDA.L vs. LQDH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SWDA.L) and iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SWDA.L is traded in GBp, while LQDH is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the LQDH values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SWDA.L achieves a 8.92% return, which is significantly higher than LQDH's 3.16% return. Over the past 10 years, SWDA.L has outperformed LQDH with an annualized return of 13.84%, while LQDH has yielded a comparatively lower 5.33% annualized return.


SWDA.L

1D
-0.34%
1M
2.74%
YTD
8.92%
6M
8.96%
1Y
25.31%
3Y*
17.64%
5Y*
12.67%
10Y*
13.84%

LQDH

1D
-0.05%
1M
2.76%
YTD
3.16%
6M
2.47%
1Y
8.74%
3Y*
5.96%
5Y*
6.44%
10Y*
5.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
8.92%12.64%21.11%17.59%-8.33%23.64%12.25%23.03%-3.78%11.78%
LQDH
iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
3.16%-0.62%9.31%5.59%9.79%2.80%-1.30%5.34%3.60%-3.16%

Correlation

The correlation between SWDA.L and LQDH is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.26

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

0.26

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

0.22

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2014

0.36

The correlation between SWDA.L and LQDH shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (5 years) to 0.36 (all time), 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

SWDA.L vs. LQDH — Risk / Return Rank

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

SWDA.L
SWDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
SWDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SWDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
SWDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
SWDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
SWDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

LQDH
LQDH Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
LQDH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQDH Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQDH Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
LQDH Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQDH Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
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.

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SWDA.L) and iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDH). 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.


SWDA.LLQDHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.24

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.85

2.40

+1.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.36

6.27

+9.09

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SWDA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is higher than the LQDH Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SWDA.L and LQDH, 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


SWDA.LLQDHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.47

1.35

+1.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.96

0.76

+0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.96

0.51

+0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.56

-0.03

Drawdowns

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SWDA.L drawdown since its inception was -41.70%, which is greater than LQDH's maximum drawdown of -18.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SWDA.L and LQDH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SWDA.LLQDHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.70%

-18.37%

-23.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.55%

-3.65%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.50%

-10.80%

-7.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.50%

-11.17%

-7.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.58%

-18.37%

-7.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

-0.98%

-0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.50%

-4.12%

-5.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.64%

1.40%

+0.24%

Volatility

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SWDA.L) has a higher volatility of 2.48% compared to iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF (LQDH) at 1.64%. This indicates that SWDA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQDH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SWDA.LLQDHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.48%

1.64%

+0.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.31%

4.62%

+2.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.24%

6.52%

+3.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.31%

8.52%

+4.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.57%

10.44%

+4.13%

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Expense Ratio Comparison

SWDA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than LQDH'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

SWDA.L vs. LQDH - Dividend Comparison

SWDA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LQDH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.96%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LQDH
iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
5.96%6.06%7.57%7.69%3.73%1.65%2.22%3.09%5.08%2.37%2.33%2.98%
SWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


SWDA.L and LQDH have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SWDA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SWDA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LQDH.

SWDA.L is categorized as Global Equities, while LQDH is Corporate Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SWDA.L and 0.25% for LQDH.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SWDA.L and LQDH

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