LFBE vs. LFAW

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

LFBE (LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF) and LFAW (LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF) are both Government Bonds funds from Stone Ridge. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LFBE returned 3.74% vs 4.36% for LFAW. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.

Performance

LFBE vs. LFAW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF (LFBE) and LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFBE achieves a 0.37% return, which is significantly higher than LFAW's 0.21% return.

LFBE

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 1.82%
• YTD: 0.37%
• 6M: 0.31%
• 1Y: 3.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LFAW

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 1.62%
• YTD: 0.21%
• 6M: 0.18%
• 1Y: 4.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LFBE vs. LFAW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LFBE LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF	0.37%	5.14%
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF	0.21%	6.22%

Correlation

The correlation between LFBE and LFAW 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 Jan 6, 2025	0.99

The correlation between LFBE and LFAW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LFBE vs. LFAW — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFBE

LFBE Risk / Return Rank: 14
LFBE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
LFBE Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
LFBE Omega Ratio Rank: 13
LFBE Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
LFBE Martin Ratio Rank: 15

LFAW

LFAW Risk / Return Rank: 17
LFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
LFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
LFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 16
LFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
LFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

LFBE vs. LFAW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF (LFBE) and LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW). 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.

	LFBE	LFAW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.46	0.59	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.72	0.90	-0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.10	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.56	0.69	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.39	1.77	-0.38

LFBE vs. LFAW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFBE Sharpe Ratio is 0.46, which is comparable to the LFAW Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFBE and LFAW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LFBE vs. LFAW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFBE drawdown since its inception was -7.65%, smaller than the maximum LFAW drawdown of -11.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFBE and LFAW.

Drawdown Indicators

	LFBE	LFAW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.65%	-11.37%	+3.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.76%	-6.34%	-0.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.38%	-3.78%	+0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.92%	-5.40%	+2.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.70%	2.47%	+0.23%

Volatility

LFBE vs. LFAW - Volatility Comparison

LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF (LFBE) has a higher volatility of 1.94% compared to LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) at 1.82%. This indicates that LFBE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LFAW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LFBE	LFAW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.94%	1.82%	+0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.86%	5.46%	+0.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.12%	7.47%	+0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.31%	8.94%	+0.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.31%	8.94%	+0.37%

LFBE vs. LFAW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LFBE and LFAW 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

LFBE vs. LFAW - Dividend Comparison

LFBE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.23%, more than LFAW's 6.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF	6.42%	9.85%	1.47%
LFBE LifeX 2065 Longevity Income ETF	8.23%	12.22%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LFBE and LFAW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.99, LFBE and LFAW 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.

Which is riskier, LFBE or LFAW?

LFBE has higher volatility (1.94%) compared to LFAW (1.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFBE dropped -7.65% vs LFAW's -11.37%.

Which ETF is better, LFBE or LFAW?

On 1-year performance, LFAW leads with 4.36% vs 3.74% for LFBE. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, LFAW has been the lower-risk option at 1.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LFBE or LFAW?

Over the 1-year period, LFAW has performed better with a 4.36% return vs 3.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LFBE or LFAW?

LFBE and LFAW have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LFBE or LFAW?

LFBE has the higher dividend yield at 8.23%, compared with 6.42% for LFAW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.59 vs 0.46), 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.