IWM vs LQD
IWM vs LQD · Last updated April 5, 2026
| Metric | IWM | LQD | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | $251.29 | $109.12 | — |
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.14% | LQD |
| Dividend Yield | N/A | N/A | — |
| AUM | $74.0B | $32.0B | IWM |
Performance Comparison
| Period | IWM | LQD |
|---|---|---|
| 1M | -1.96% | -0.87% |
| 3M | -0.39% | -0.11% |
| 6M | +2.75% | +0.05% |
| YTD | +2.27% | +0.15% |
| 1Y | +40.18% | +4.94% |
| 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| 5Y | N/A | N/A |
Dividend Comparison
| Ex-Date | Ticker | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| April 1, 2026 | LQD | $0.45 |
| March 17, 2026 | IWM | $0.44 |
| March 2, 2026 | LQD | $0.38 |
| February 2, 2026 | LQD | $0.41 |
| December 19, 2025 | LQD | $0.44 |
| December 16, 2025 | IWM | $0.84 |
| December 1, 2025 | LQD | $0.41 |
| November 3, 2025 | LQD | $0.40 |
| October 1, 2025 | LQD | $0.41 |
| September 16, 2025 | IWM | $0.68 |
| September 2, 2025 | LQD | $0.38 |
| August 1, 2025 | LQD | $0.44 |
| July 1, 2025 | LQD | $0.40 |
| June 16, 2025 | IWM | $0.58 |
| June 2, 2025 | LQD | $0.40 |
| May 1, 2025 | LQD | $0.43 |
| March 18, 2025 | IWM | $0.46 |
| December 17, 2024 | IWM | $0.69 |
| September 25, 2024 | IWM | $0.75 |
| June 11, 2024 | IWM | $0.56 |
Key Differences
IWM (IWM) and LQD (LQD) are both popular exchange-traded funds that investors frequently compare. Here is how they differ based on the latest available data.
LQD charges an expense ratio of 0.14%, which is lower than IWM's 0.19%. This 0.05% difference translates to approximately $50.00 per year on a $100,000 investment. Over a 30-year period, the compounding effect of lower fees could result in a difference of roughly $2,250.00.
IWM is the larger fund with $74.0B in assets under management — roughly 2.3x the size of LQD's $32.0B. Larger AUM generally correlates with higher trading volume, tighter bid-ask spreads, and lower trading costs for investors.
These metrics provide a quantitative foundation for comparing IWM and LQD. Individual investment suitability depends on personal financial circumstances, goals, and risk tolerance.
How to Compare IWM and LQD
- If minimizing costs is a priority, compare the expense ratios: IWM charges 0.19% and LQD charges 0.14%.
- For liquidity, larger funds with higher AUM typically have tighter bid-ask spreads and more efficient trading.
- Review historical performance across different time periods (1-month to 5-year) to understand how each has performed in various market conditions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is IWM or LQD a better investment?
Whether IWM or LQD is more suitable depends on your individual investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. IWM and LQD differ in key metrics like expense ratio, dividend yield, and assets under management. This page provides objective data to help you compare the two.
What is the expense ratio difference between IWM and LQD?
LQD has an expense ratio of 0.14%, while IWM charges 0.19%. On a $10,000 investment, this 0.05% difference costs approximately $5.00 per year.
Which fund is larger, IWM or LQD?
IWM has $74.0B in assets under management, making it the larger fund. Larger funds tend to have better liquidity and tighter bid-ask spreads.
What are the risks of investing in IWM vs LQD?
Both IWM and LQD carry market risk — their values can decline during market downturns. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Consider factors like volatility, sector concentration, and your own risk tolerance when evaluating either investment.
See how expense ratio differences affect your returns over time → Expense Ratio Calculator