TBF vs. LQDW
TBF (ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury) and LQDW (iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TBF is a Inverse Bonds fund tracking the U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Index (-100%), while LQDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TBF returned 8.00%/yr vs 3.64%/yr for LQDW. At a correlation of -0.72, they often move in opposite directions. TBF charges 0.94%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for LQDW.
Performance
TBF vs. LQDW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with TBF having a 1.71% return and LQDW slightly lower at 1.70%.
TBF
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -1.61%
- YTD
- 1.71%
- 6M
- 2.04%
- 1Y
- 1.36%
- 3Y*
- 8.00%
- 5Y*
- 10.44%
- 10Y*
- 2.91%
LQDW
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- 1.18%
- YTD
- 1.70%
- 6M
- 1.70%
- 1Y
- 6.47%
- 3Y*
- 3.64%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TBF vs. LQDW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TBF ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury | 1.71% | 1.27% | 16.33% | 2.43% | 12.37% |
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 1.70% | 9.05% | 2.60% | 3.99% | -6.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBF and LQDW is -0.75, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2022 | -0.72 |
The correlation between TBF and LQDW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.75 to -0.72 - 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
TBF vs. LQDW — Risk / Return Rank
TBF
LQDW
TBF vs. LQDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF) 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.
| TBF | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.36 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.19 | 2.51 | -2.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.41 | 9.31 | -8.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TBF vs. LQDW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBF drawdown since its inception was -70.40%, which is greater than LQDW's maximum drawdown of -9.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBF and LQDW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBF | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.40% | -9.20% | -61.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.23% | -2.59% | -4.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.79% | -6.74% | -11.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.79% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.39% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.76% | -0.22% | -43.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.41% | -2.32% | -45.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.31% | 0.70% | +2.61% |
Volatility
TBF vs. LQDW - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury (TBF) has a higher volatility of 2.22% compared to iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (LQDW) at 0.99%. This indicates that TBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQDW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBF | LQDW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.22% | 0.99% | +1.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.53% | 3.12% | +3.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.31% | 3.63% | +5.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.68% | 5.47% | +10.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.52% | 5.47% | +9.05% |
TBF vs. LQDW - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBF has a 0.94% expense ratio, which is higher than LQDW's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBF vs. LQDW - Dividend Comparison
TBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than LQDW's 12.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQDW iShares Investment Grade Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF | 12.52% | 16.02% | 15.74% | 19.28% | 8.85% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TBF ProShares Short 20+ Year Treasury | 2.86% | 3.39% | 4.06% | 4.99% | 0.36% | 0.00% | 0.22% | 1.68% | 0.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TBF and LQDW have a correlation of -0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TBF has higher volatility (2.22%) compared to LQDW (0.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBF dropped -70.40% vs LQDW's -9.20%.
On 3-year performance, TBF leads with 8.00% vs 3.64% for LQDW. On fees, LQDW is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, LQDW has been the lower-risk option at 0.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, TBF has performed better with a 8.00% return vs 3.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LQDW is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.94% for TBF.
LQDW has the higher dividend yield at 12.52%, compared with 2.86% for TBF.
TBF is categorized as Inverse Bonds, while LQDW is Corporate Bonds. TBF tracks U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Index (-100%), while LQDW tracks CBOE LQD BuyWrite Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.94% for TBF and 0.34% for LQDW.
LQDW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 0.15), 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 TBF 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