LFDR vs. BNDD
LFDR (LifeX Durable Income ETF) and BNDD (Quadratic Deflation ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LFDR returned 4.52% vs 3.39% for BNDD. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LFDR charges 0.25%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for BNDD.
Performance
LFDR vs. BNDD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFDR achieves a -0.39% return, which is significantly lower than BNDD's 4.32% return.
LFDR
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 0.65%
- YTD
- -0.39%
- 6M
- -1.72%
- 1Y
- 4.52%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BNDD
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- 1.37%
- YTD
- 4.32%
- 6M
- 2.24%
- 1Y
- 3.39%
- 3Y*
- -3.91%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LFDR vs. BNDD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFDR LifeX Durable Income ETF | -0.39% | 4.82% | -1.64% |
BNDD Quadratic Deflation ETF | 4.32% | -8.17% | -2.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFDR and BNDD is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2024 | 0.68 |
The correlation between LFDR and BNDD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.68 - 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
LFDR vs. BNDD — Risk / Return Rank
LFDR
BNDD
LFDR vs. BNDD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) and Quadratic Deflation ETF (BNDD). 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.
| LFDR | BNDD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.06 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.67 | 0.56 | +0.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.76 | 1.20 | +0.56 |
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
| LFDR | BNDD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.54 | 0.32 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.19 | -0.33 | +0.52 |
Drawdowns
LFDR vs. BNDD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFDR drawdown since its inception was -7.77%, smaller than the maximum BNDD drawdown of -30.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFDR and BNDD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFDR | BNDD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.77% | -30.87% | +23.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.75% | -6.09% | -0.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.12% | -26.51% | +22.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.95% | -19.34% | +16.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.57% | 2.83% | -0.26% |
Volatility
LFDR vs. BNDD - Volatility Comparison
LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) has a higher volatility of 2.56% compared to Quadratic Deflation ETF (BNDD) at 2.21%. This indicates that LFDR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LFDR | BNDD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.56% | 2.21% | +0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.71% | 8.11% | -2.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.37% | 10.59% | -2.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.61% | 13.38% | -3.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.61% | 13.38% | -3.77% |
LFDR vs. BNDD - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFDR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than BNDD's 1.02% expense ratio.
Dividends
LFDR vs. BNDD - Dividend Comparison
LFDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.27%, more than BNDD's 3.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNDD Quadratic Deflation ETF | 3.61% | 3.82% | 3.85% | 4.30% | 43.17% | 1.04% |
LFDR LifeX Durable Income ETF | 8.27% | 13.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LFDR and BNDD have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LFDR has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to BNDD (2.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFDR dropped -7.77% vs BNDD's -30.87%.
On 1-year performance, LFDR leads with 4.52% vs 3.39% for BNDD. On fees, LFDR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BNDD has been the lower-risk option at 2.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LFDR has performed better with a 4.52% return vs 3.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LFDR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for BNDD.
LFDR has the higher dividend yield at 8.27%, compared with 3.61% for BNDD.
They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFDR and 1.02% for BNDD.
LFDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.54 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 LFDR and BNDD
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