PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LFAI vs. XHLF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LFAI vs. XHLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF (LFAI) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFAI achieves a -0.12% return, which is significantly lower than XHLF's 1.39% return.


LFAI

1D
0.15%
1M
0.15%
YTD
-0.12%
6M
-0.69%
1Y
4.46%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

XHLF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.27%
YTD
1.39%
6M
1.71%
1Y
3.92%
3Y*
4.62%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LFAI vs. XHLF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LFAI and XHLF is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024

0.09

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. XHLF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LFAI
LFAI Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
LFAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LFAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
LFAI Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
LFAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
LFAI Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

XHLF
XHLF Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
XHLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XHLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
XHLF Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
XHLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
XHLF Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

LFAI vs. XHLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF (LFAI) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). 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.


LFAIXHLFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.71

12.43

-11.72

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.07

45.85

-44.78

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

11.75

-10.63

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.75

98.81

-98.06

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.13

670.31

-668.18

LFAI vs. XHLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFAI Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the XHLF Sharpe Ratio of 12.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFAI and XHLF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LFAIXHLFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.71

12.43

-11.72

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.13

10.75

-10.88

Drawdowns

LFAI vs. XHLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFAI drawdown since its inception was -8.64%, which is greater than XHLF's maximum drawdown of -0.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAI and XHLF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LFAIXHLFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.64%

-0.11%

-8.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.30%

-0.04%

-5.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.08%

0.00%

-3.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.52%

-0.00%

-3.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.86%

0.01%

+1.85%

Volatility

LFAI vs. XHLF - Volatility Comparison

LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF (LFAI) has a higher volatility of 2.08% compared to BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF) at 0.08%. This indicates that LFAI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XHLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LFAIXHLFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.08%

0.08%

+2.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.48%

0.22%

+4.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.31%

0.32%

+5.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.16%

0.42%

+6.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.16%

0.42%

+6.74%

LFAI vs. XHLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFAI has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XHLF'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. XHLF - Dividend Comparison

LFAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.23%, more than XHLF's 3.85% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
LFAI
LifeX 2050 Longevity Income ETF
13.51%16.48%1.91%0.00%0.00%
XHLF
BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF
3.85%3.98%4.96%4.50%0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions


LFAI and XHLF have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LFAI has higher volatility (2.08%) compared to XHLF (0.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFAI dropped -8.64% vs XHLF's -0.11%.

On 1-year performance, LFAI leads with 4.46% vs 3.92% for XHLF. On fees, XHLF is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, XHLF has been the lower-risk option at 0.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LFAI has performed better with a 4.46% return vs 3.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XHLF is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LFAI.

LFAI has the higher dividend yield at 14.23%, compared with 3.85% for XHLF.

They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFAI and 0.03% for XHLF.

XHLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (12.43 vs 0.71), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LFAI and XHLF

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