LFAW vs. BCKT
LFAW (LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF) and BCKT (LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF) are both Government Bonds funds from Stone Ridge. Both are actively managed. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.
Performance
LFAW vs. BCKT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFAW achieves a -2.91% return, which is significantly lower than BCKT's 0.52% return.
LFAW
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- -3.12%
- 6M
- -2.87%
- YTD
- -2.91%
- 1Y
- -0.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -3.68%
BCKT
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- -0.07%
- 6M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 0.52%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10.12K | $7.01K | $9.67K | |
| $4.20K | $3.07K | $6.14K |
LFAW vs. BCKT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | -2.91% | 0.27% |
BCKT LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF | 0.52% | 1.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFAW and BCKT is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.74 |
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
LFAW vs. BCKT — Risk / Return Rank
LFAW
BCKT
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LFAW vs. BCKT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) and LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF (BCKT). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| LFAW | BCKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.04 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.08 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LFAW vs. BCKT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFAW drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, which is greater than BCKT's maximum drawdown of -1.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAW and BCKT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFAW | BCKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.37% | -1.00% | -10.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.34% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.78% | -0.38% | -6.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.35% | -0.29% | -5.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.83% | — | — |
Volatility
LFAW vs. BCKT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LFAW | BCKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.96% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.66% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.43% | 1.54% | +5.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.87% | 1.54% | +7.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.87% | 1.54% | +7.33% |
LFAW vs. BCKT - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both LFAW and BCKT have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
LFAW vs. BCKT - Dividend Comparison
LFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.61%, less than BCKT's 20.32% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BCKT LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF | 20.32% | 5.36% | 0.00% |
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | 6.61% | 9.85% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LFAW and BCKT have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LFAW and BCKT have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.
BCKT has the higher dividend yield at 20.32%, compared with 6.61% for LFAW.
Find the right allocation for LFAW and BCKT
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