PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LFDR vs. FAAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LFDR vs. FAAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) and First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFDR achieves a 0.36% return, which is significantly lower than FAAR's 20.23% return.


LFDR

1D
-0.61%
1M
1.81%
YTD
0.36%
6M
0.30%
1Y
3.80%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FAAR

1D
-0.05%
1M
-4.34%
YTD
20.23%
6M
19.92%
1Y
26.86%
3Y*
10.91%
5Y*
7.89%
10Y*
4.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LFDR vs. FAAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
LFDR
LifeX Durable Income ETF
0.36%4.82%-1.64%
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
20.23%8.07%-0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between LFDR and FAAR is -0.30, 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

-0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2024

-0.22

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. FAAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFDR
LFDR Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
LFDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LFDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
LFDR Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
LFDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
LFDR Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

FAAR
FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LFDR vs. FAAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) and First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). 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.


LFDRFAARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.55

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.35

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.57

4.75

-4.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.41

14.70

-13.28

LFDR vs. FAAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFDR Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is lower than the FAAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFDR and FAAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LFDR vs. FAAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFDR drawdown since its inception was -7.77%, smaller than the maximum FAAR drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFDR and FAAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LFDRFAARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.77%

-18.03%

+10.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.75%

-5.68%

-1.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.40%

-5.43%

+2.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.97%

-7.82%

+4.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.69%

1.89%

+0.80%

Volatility

LFDR vs. FAAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) is 1.94%, while First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) has a volatility of 2.47%. This indicates that LFDR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LFDRFAARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.94%

2.47%

-0.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.84%

9.68%

-3.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.17%

13.37%

-5.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.55%

12.95%

-3.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.55%

11.53%

-1.98%

LFDR vs. FAAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFDR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FAAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

LFDR vs. FAAR - Dividend Comparison

LFDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.21%, less than FAAR's 9.57% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
9.57%11.63%3.45%3.20%5.82%6.49%3.05%1.02%0.58%2.83%
LFDR
LifeX Durable Income ETF
8.21%13.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LFDR and FAAR have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FAAR has higher volatility (2.47%) compared to LFDR (1.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFDR dropped -7.77% vs FAAR's -18.03%.

On 1-year performance, FAAR leads with 26.86% vs 3.80% for LFDR. On fees, LFDR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, LFDR has been the lower-risk option at 1.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FAAR has performed better with a 26.86% return vs 3.80%. 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 0.95% for FAAR.

FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.57%, compared with 8.21% for LFDR.

LFDR is categorized as Government Bonds, while FAAR is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFDR and 0.95% for FAAR.

FAAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 0.47), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LFDR and FAAR

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