Which returned more over the last year, LQD or MOAT?

In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, LQD returned −2.7% and MOAT returned +11.3%, so MOAT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, LQD or MOAT?

LQD charges 0.14% a year and MOAT charges 0.46%, so LQD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

LQD vs MOAT: how they differ

LQD and MOAT hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and MOAT returned more over the year.

iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, LQD and MOAT hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in LQD	Only in MOAT
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY 0.88%	Veeva Systems Inc 3.41%
ANHEUSER-BUSCH COMPANIES LLC 0.12%	Airbnb Inc 2.88%
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM INTERNATIONAL FIN 0.11%	Microsoft Corp 2.79%
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING L 144A 0.10%	Charles Schwab Corp/The 2.75%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO MTN 0.09%	Lpl Financial Holdings Inc 2.73%
BRITISH TELECOMMUNICATIONS PLC 0.08%	Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.58%
MORGAN STANLEY (FXD-FRN) MTN 0.08%	Nvidia Corp 2.58%
CITIGROUP INC (FX-FRN) 0.07%	Estee Lauder Cos Inc/The 2.52%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Sep 10, 2026.

LQD and MOAT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF	MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	iShares	VanEck
What it is	US investment grade bonds	Morningstar Wide Moat
Total return, 1 year	−2.7%	+11.3%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−20.2 pts	−6.2 pts
Expense ratio	0.14%	0.46%
Holdings	3149	55

LQD in plain words

LQD is a bond fund tracking the US investment grade bonds. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −2.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.14% a year. It sat 6.4% below its high of Sep 22, 2021 on Sep 11, 2026.

MOAT in plain words

MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 55 positions, with the top ten at 27.1%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, LQD or MOAT?: In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, LQD returned −2.7% and MOAT returned +11.3%, so MOAT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, LQD or MOAT?: LQD charges 0.14% a year and MOAT charges 0.46%, so LQD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

LQD against MOAT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, LQD against MOAT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/lqd-vs-moat Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources