PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LFAW vs. LIFT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LFAW vs. LIFT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) and LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF (LIFT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFAW achieves a -0.42% return, which is significantly lower than LIFT's 0.72% return.


LFAW

1D
-0.34%
1M
0.59%
YTD
-0.42%
6M
-1.58%
1Y
5.06%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

LIFT

1D
0.00%
1M
0.31%
YTD
0.72%
6M
1.04%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LFAW vs. LIFT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
LFAW
LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF
-0.42%0.07%
LIFT
LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF
0.72%1.16%

Correlation

The correlation between LFAW and LIFT is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2025

0.50

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. LIFT — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFAW
LFAW Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
LFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
LFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
LFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
LFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

LIFT
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.

LFAW vs. LIFT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) and LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF (LIFT). 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.


LFAWLIFTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.16

LFAW vs. LIFT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LFAWLIFTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.66

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.29

2.24

-2.53

Drawdowns

LFAW vs. LIFT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFAW drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, which is greater than LIFT's maximum drawdown of -0.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAW and LIFT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LFAWLIFTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.37%

-0.49%

-10.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.38%

-0.05%

-4.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.45%

-0.09%

-5.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.35%

Volatility

LFAW vs. LIFT - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LFAWLIFTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.65%

1.24%

+6.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.99%

1.24%

+7.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.99%

1.24%

+7.75%

LFAW vs. LIFT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LFAW and LIFT 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. LIFT - Dividend Comparison

LFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.46%, less than LIFT's 31.05% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
LFAW
LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF
6.46%9.85%1.47%
LIFT
LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF
31.05%8.63%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LFAW and LIFT have a correlation of 0.50, 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 LIFT have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

LIFT has the higher dividend yield at 31.05%, compared with 6.46% for LFAW.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LFAW and LIFT

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