LFDR vs. GBIL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LFDR (LifeX Durable Income ETF) and GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. LFDR is actively managed, while GBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, LFDR returned 3.55% vs 3.81% for GBIL. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LFDR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GBIL.

Performance

LFDR vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFDR achieves a 0.50% return, which is significantly lower than GBIL's 1.57% return.

LFDR

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 0.50%
• 6M: 0.33%
• 1Y: 3.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GBIL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.66%
• 1Y: 3.81%
• 3Y*: 4.59%
• 5Y*: 3.35%
• 10Y*: —

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

LFDR vs. GBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LFDR LifeX Durable Income ETF	0.50%	4.82%	-1.64%
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	1.57%	4.12%	0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between LFDR and GBIL is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2024	0.10

Return for Risk

LFDR vs. GBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFDR

LFDR Risk / Return Rank: 15
LFDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
LFDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
LFDR Omega Ratio Rank: 14
LFDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
LFDR Martin Ratio Rank: 15

GBIL

GBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
GBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
GBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.

	LFDR	GBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.44	16.78	-16.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.69	104.00	-103.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	42.59	-41.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.53	191.21	-190.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.32	1,621.11	-1,619.80

LFDR vs. GBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFDR Sharpe Ratio is 0.44, which is lower than the GBIL Sharpe Ratio of 16.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFDR and GBIL, 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

LFDR vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFDR drawdown since its inception was -7.77%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFDR and GBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LFDR	GBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.77%	-0.76%	-7.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.75%	-0.02%	-6.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.27%	0.00%	-3.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.97%	-0.04%	-2.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.70%	0.00%	+2.70%

Volatility

LFDR vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison

LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) has a higher volatility of 1.93% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.05%. This indicates that LFDR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LFDR	GBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.93%	0.05%	+1.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.83%	0.14%	+5.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.15%	0.23%	+7.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.53%	0.58%	+8.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.53%	0.47%	+9.06%

LFDR vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFDR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% 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

LFDR vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison

LFDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.20%, more than GBIL's 3.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF	3.74%	4.02%	4.93%	4.77%	1.37%	0.00%	0.81%	2.20%	1.70%	0.74%	0.11%
LFDR LifeX Durable Income ETF	8.20%	13.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LFDR and GBIL in my portfolio?

LFDR and GBIL have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LFDR or GBIL?

LFDR has higher volatility (1.93%) compared to GBIL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFDR dropped -7.77% vs GBIL's -0.76%.

Which ETF is better, LFDR or GBIL?

On 1-year performance, GBIL leads with 3.81% vs 3.55% for LFDR. On fees, GBIL is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LFDR or GBIL?

Over the 1-year period, GBIL has performed better with a 3.81% return vs 3.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LFDR or GBIL?

GBIL is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LFDR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LFDR or GBIL?

LFDR has the higher dividend yield at 8.20%, compared with 3.74% for GBIL.

What is the main difference between LFDR and GBIL?

They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LFDR and 0.12% for GBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.78 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.