LFAW vs. SPTL
LFAW (LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF) and SPTL (SPDR Portfolio Long Term Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. LFAW is actively managed, while SPTL is passively managed. Over the past year, LFAW returned 3.92% vs 3.88% for SPTL. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LFAW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SPTL.
Performance
LFAW vs. SPTL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFAW achieves a -0.24% return, which is significantly lower than SPTL's -0.19% return.
LFAW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- -0.24%
- 6M
- -0.95%
- 1Y
- 3.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SPTL
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- YTD
- -0.19%
- 6M
- -1.00%
- 1Y
- 3.88%
- 3Y*
- -0.59%
- 5Y*
- -5.28%
- 10Y*
- -1.04%
LFAW vs. SPTL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | -0.24% | 6.00% | -9.41% |
SPTL SPDR Portfolio Long Term Treasury ETF | -0.19% | 5.28% | -11.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFAW and SPTL is 0.99 - 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 | 0.99 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024 | 0.99 |
The correlation between LFAW and SPTL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - 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
LFAW vs. SPTL — Risk / Return Rank
LFAW
SPTL
LFAW vs. SPTL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) and SPDR Portfolio Long Term Treasury ETF (SPTL). 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.
| LFAW | SPTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.08 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | 0.55 | +0.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.67 | 1.44 | +0.23 |
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
| LFAW | SPTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.52 | 0.44 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.36 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.07 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.28 | 0.24 | -0.52 |
Drawdowns
LFAW vs. SPTL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFAW drawdown since its inception was -11.37%, smaller than the maximum SPTL drawdown of -46.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFAW and SPTL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFAW | SPTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.37% | -46.20% | +34.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.34% | -7.04% | +0.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -46.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.21% | -36.75% | +32.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.44% | -14.25% | +8.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.36% | 2.70% | -0.34% |
Volatility
LFAW vs. SPTL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) is 2.39%, while SPDR Portfolio Long Term Treasury ETF (SPTL) has a volatility of 2.60%. This indicates that LFAW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPTL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LFAW | SPTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.39% | 2.60% | -0.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.34% | 5.97% | -0.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.65% | 8.92% | -1.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.98% | 14.61% | -5.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.98% | 13.94% | -4.96% |
LFAW vs. SPTL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFAW has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SPTL'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
LFAW vs. SPTL - Dividend Comparison
LFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.45%, more than SPTL's 4.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF | 6.45% | 9.85% | 1.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SPTL SPDR Portfolio Long Term Treasury ETF | 4.21% | 4.12% | 4.03% | 3.24% | 2.75% | 1.68% | 1.71% | 2.45% | 2.69% | 2.53% | 2.56% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, LFAW and SPTL 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.
SPTL has higher volatility (2.60%) compared to LFAW (2.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFAW dropped -11.37% vs SPTL's -46.20%.
On 1-year performance, LFAW leads with 3.92% vs 3.88% for SPTL. On fees, SPTL is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, LFAW has been the lower-risk option at 2.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LFAW has performed better with a 3.92% return vs 3.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SPTL is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LFAW.
LFAW has the higher dividend yield at 6.45%, compared with 4.21% for SPTL.
They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFAW and 0.03% for SPTL.
LFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.52 vs 0.44), 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 SPTL
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