Screener
AMAX vs LQDH
Adaptive Hedged Multi-Asset Income ETF vs iShares Interest Rate Hedged Corporate Bond ETF
Key differences
- LQDH costs 1.12% less per year.
- LQDH is significantly larger than AMAX — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- AMAX is classified as alternative, while LQDH is fixed income — different risk/return profiles.
- AMAX follows a option income strategy; LQDH uses index tracking.
- AMAX has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| AMAX | LQDH | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 1.36% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $60M | $506M |
| Since | 2009 | 2014 |
| Dividend yield | 10.63% | 6.11% |
| Asset class | alternative | fixed income |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | option income | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +11.8% | +8.5% |
| CAGR 3Y | +9.4% | +8.6% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +5.3% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.59 | 1.38 |
| Volatility 1Y | 9.98% | 2.73% |
| Max drawdown | -16.25% | -24.63% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to AMAX and LQDH
Explore further