LFAI vs. SCHQ
LFAI (LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF) and SCHQ (Schwab Long-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. LFAI is actively managed, while SCHQ is passively managed. Over the past year, LFAI returned 4.26% vs 5.22% for SCHQ. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LFAI charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHQ.
Performance
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
As of year-to-date, both investments have demonstrated similar returns, with LFAI at -0.43% and SCHQ at -0.43%.
LFAI
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- -0.43%
- 6M
- -1.22%
- 1Y
- 4.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHQ
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 0.65%
- YTD
- -0.43%
- 6M
- -1.74%
- 1Y
- 5.22%
- 3Y*
- -0.72%
- 5Y*
- -5.29%
- 10Y*
- —
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFAI LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF | -0.43% | 6.06% | -7.12% |
SCHQ Schwab Long-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | -0.43% | 5.50% | -11.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFAI and SCHQ is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024 | 0.97 |
The correlation between LFAI and SCHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LFAI vs. SCHQ — Risk / Return Rank
LFAI
SCHQ
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF (LFAI) and Schwab Long-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHQ). 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.
| LFAI | SCHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 1.10 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.81 | 0.75 | +0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.28 | 1.94 | +0.35 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LFAI | SCHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.68 | 0.59 | +0.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.37 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.16 | -0.25 | +0.09 |
Drawdowns
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFAI drawdown since its inception was -8.64%, smaller than the maximum SCHQ drawdown of -46.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAI and SCHQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFAI | SCHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.64% | -46.13% | +37.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.30% | -7.01% | +1.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.65% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -40.93% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.38% | -36.82% | +33.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.52% | -26.36% | +22.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.87% | 2.70% | -0.83% |
Volatility
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF (LFAI) is 2.03%, while Schwab Long-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHQ) has a volatility of 2.57%. This indicates that LFAI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LFAI | SCHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.03% | 2.57% | -0.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.42% | 5.94% | -1.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.30% | 8.93% | -2.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.16% | 14.54% | -7.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.16% | 15.33% | -8.17% |
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFAI has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHQ's 0.03% 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
LFAI vs. SCHQ - Dividend Comparison
LFAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.55%, more than SCHQ's 4.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFAI LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF | 13.55% | 16.48% | 1.91% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHQ Schwab Long-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 4.79% | 4.54% | 4.58% | 3.79% | 2.88% | 1.69% | 1.51% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.98, LFAI and SCHQ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
SCHQ has higher volatility (2.57%) compared to LFAI (2.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFAI dropped -8.64% vs SCHQ's -46.13%.
On 1-year performance, SCHQ leads with 5.22% vs 4.26% for LFAI. On fees, SCHQ is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, LFAI has been the lower-risk option at 2.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SCHQ has performed better with a 5.22% return vs 4.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHQ is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LFAI.
LFAI has the higher dividend yield at 13.55%, compared with 4.79% for SCHQ.
They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFAI and 0.03% for SCHQ.
LFAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.68 vs 0.59), 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 LFAI and SCHQ
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