LQD vs HYG: returns, risk and drawdowns compared
iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF against iShares iBoxx $ High Yield Corporate Bond ETF, over the same 19 years (May 2007 to October 2026) with dividends reinvested.
Data updated October 2026
From May 2007 to October 2026, LQD returned 3.8% a year and HYG 4.7% a year on average, so HYG came out ahead by 0.9% a year. HYG was the more volatile of the two (10.2% against 8.2% a year), and the deepest falls from a month-end high were 23.3% for LQD and 30.2% for HYG.
The correlation of monthly returns was 0.69: they moved together only in part. Over 199 rolling 3-year periods, LQD did better in 32% and HYG in 68%.
Side by side
| LQD | HYG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return (CAGR) | +3.8% | +4.7% |
| Total return | +107% | +145% |
| Annual volatility | 8.2% | 10.2% |
| Maximum drawdown (month-end) | −23.3% | −30.2% |
| Worst month | −10.7% | −11.5% |
| Best month | +13.8% | +16.8% |
| Positive months | 59% | 65% |
| Best year | 2019: +17.4% | 2009: +28.5% |
| Worst year | 2022: −17.9% | 2008: −17.6% |
| 1-year return | −3.9% | +1.1% |
| 5 years, a year | −0.8% | +3.2% |
| 10 years, a year | +1.9% | +4.1% |
| Trading currency | USD | USD |
First nine rows: the same 234 months for both funds. Trailing returns: to each fund’s last close.
Growth of 10,000: LQD vs HYG
Returns by calendar year
| Year | LQD | HYG |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +7.9% | +8.6% |
| 2024 | +0.9% | +8.0% |
| 2023 | +9.4% | +11.6% |
| 2022 | −17.9% | −11.0% |
| 2021 | −1.8% | +3.8% |
| 2020 | +10.7% | +4.0% |
| 2019 | +17.4% | +14.1% |
| 2018 | −3.8% | −2.0% |
| 2017 | +7.1% | +6.1% |
| 2016 | +6.2% | +13.4% |
| 2015 | −1.3% | −5.0% |
| 2014 | +8.2% | +1.9% |
| 2013 | −2.0% | +5.8% |
| 2012 | +10.6% | +11.7% |
| 2011 | +9.7% | +6.8% |
| 2010 | +9.3% | +11.9% |
| 2009 | +8.5% | +28.5% |
| 2008 | +2.4% | −17.6% |
How the figures are calculated
Total return in the fund’s trading currency, from end-of-day prices with dividends reinvested on the ex-date. The fund’s own ongoing charges are already reflected in its price; trading costs, taxes and currency conversion are not included. Past returns do not predict future returns.
The comparison uses only the months in which both funds have prices, so the figures cover the same period even when one fund is older.
Questions
Which has returned more, LQD or HYG?
From May 2007 to October 2026, LQD returned +3.8% a year and HYG +4.7% a year, with dividends reinvested. Over rolling 3-year periods LQD did better in 32% of cases. Past returns do not predict future returns.
Which is riskier, LQD or HYG?
Over the same months annual volatility was 8.2% for LQD and 10.2% for HYG; the deepest fall from a month-end high was 23.3% and 30.2%, and the worst single month −10.7% and −11.5%.
How correlated are LQD and HYG?
The correlation of their monthly returns was 0.69: they moved together only in part. Combining them has historically given some diversification.
More comparisons
Source: MarketStack end-of-day prices, total return with dividends reinvested. Figures are historical and descriptive; they are not forecasts and not investment advice. MEDGE Capital does not recommend buying or selling any instrument. Risk disclaimer.