XLG vs. LQD
XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLG returned 17.23%/yr vs 2.52%/yr for LQD. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLG charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQD.
Performance
XLG vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLG achieves a 5.56% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's 0.80% return. Over the past 10 years, XLG has outperformed LQD with an annualized return of 17.23%, while LQD has yielded a comparatively lower 2.52% annualized return.
XLG
- 1D
- 1.88%
- 1M
- -1.70%
- YTD
- 5.56%
- 6M
- 6.64%
- 1Y
- 25.51%
- 3Y*
- 22.53%
- 5Y*
- 15.57%
- 10Y*
- 17.23%
LQD
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 1.43%
- YTD
- 0.80%
- 6M
- 1.10%
- 1Y
- 5.78%
- 3Y*
- 4.95%
- 5Y*
- -0.10%
- 10Y*
- 2.52%
XLG vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 5.56% | 19.51% | 33.49% | 38.16% | -24.29% | 30.77% | 24.15% | 32.04% | -3.59% | 23.04% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.80% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -3.79% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLG and LQD is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2005 | 0.06 |
Over the past year, XLG and LQD have become more correlated (0.32) than their long-term average of 0.06, 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
XLG vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
XLG
LQD
XLG vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) 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.
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.
| XLG | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.19 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.06 | 1.74 | +0.33 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.55 | 4.88 | +2.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XLG vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLG drawdown since its inception was -52.39%, which is greater than LQD's maximum drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLG and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLG | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.39% | -24.95% | -27.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.41% | -3.34% | -9.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.70% | -8.43% | -12.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.02% | -24.95% | -3.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.46% | -24.95% | -5.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.28% | -3.39% | +0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.64% | -3.99% | -3.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.39% | 1.19% | +2.20% |
Volatility
XLG vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) at 1.78%. This indicates that XLG'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
| XLG | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.58% | 1.78% | +2.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.57% | 4.02% | +6.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.78% | 5.32% | +8.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.76% | 8.65% | +10.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.88% | 8.69% | +10.19% |
XLG vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLG has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than LQD's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XLG vs. LQD - Dividend Comparison
XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than LQD's 4.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.55% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF | 0.61% | 0.64% | 0.72% | 0.97% | 1.34% | 0.94% | 1.25% | 1.58% | 2.00% | 1.85% | 2.00% | 2.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XLG and LQD have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XLG has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to LQD (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLG dropped -52.39% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.23% vs 2.52% for LQD. On fees, LQD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LQD has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 17.23% return vs 2.52%. 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 0.20% for XLG.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.55%, compared with 0.61% for XLG.
XLG is categorized as S&P 500, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while LQD tracks iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XLG and 0.15% for LQD.
XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.09), 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 XLG 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