LFAW vs. PDBC
LFAW (LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF) and PDBC (Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LFAW is a Government Bonds fund actively managed by Stone Ridge, while PDBC is a Commodities fund actively managed by Invesco. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LFAW returned 3.42% vs 27.16% for PDBC. At a correlation of -0.24, they often move in opposite directions. LFAW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PDBC.
Performance
LFAW vs. PDBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFAW achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than PDBC's 24.08% return.
LFAW
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- -0.76%
- 6M
- -1.39%
- YTD
- -0.85%
- 1Y
- 3.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PDBC
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- 6M
- 21.24%
- YTD
- 24.08%
- 1Y
- 27.16%
- 3Y*
- 9.96%
- 5Y*
- 10.22%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
LFAW vs. PDBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | -0.85% | 6.00% | -9.41% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 24.08% | 5.96% | 4.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFAW and PDBC is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2024 | -0.24 |
The correlation between LFAW and PDBC shifts across timeframes, from -0.35 (1 year) to -0.24 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. PDBC — Risk / Return Rank
LFAW
PDBC
LFAW vs. PDBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) and Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC). 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 | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.27 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 1.75 | -1.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.94 | 6.25 | -5.31 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LFAW vs. PDBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFAW drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, smaller than the maximum PDBC drawdown of -49.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAW and PDBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFAW | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.37% | -49.52% | +38.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.34% | -16.55% | +10.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.79% | -13.06% | +8.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.35% | -23.11% | +17.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.56% | 4.64% | -2.08% |
Volatility
LFAW vs. PDBC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) is 2.34%, while Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF (PDBC) has a volatility of 5.48%. This indicates that LFAW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PDBC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LFAW | PDBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.34% | 5.48% | -3.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.62% | 16.59% | -10.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.49% | 18.72% | -11.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.91% | 19.19% | -10.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.91% | 17.75% | -8.84% |
LFAW vs. PDBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFAW has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than PDBC's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
LFAW vs. PDBC - Dividend Comparison
LFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.47%, more than PDBC's 3.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | 6.47% | 9.85% | 1.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PDBC Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF | 3.09% | 3.84% | 4.42% | 4.21% | 13.05% | 50.83% | 0.01% | 1.40% | 1.00% | 3.83% | 6.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LFAW and PDBC have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PDBC has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to LFAW (2.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFAW dropped -11.37% vs PDBC's -49.52%.
On 1-year performance, PDBC leads with 27.16% vs 3.42% for LFAW. On fees, LFAW is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, LFAW has been the lower-risk option at 2.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PDBC has performed better with a 27.16% return vs 3.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LFAW is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for PDBC.
LFAW has the higher dividend yield at 6.47%, compared with 3.09% for PDBC.
LFAW is categorized as Government Bonds, while PDBC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFAW and 0.58% for PDBC.
PDBC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 0.32), 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 LFAW and PDBC
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