LIAM vs. CPII

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

LIAM (LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF) and CPII (Ionic Inflation Protection ETF) are both Inflation-Protected Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LIAM returned 3.08% vs 3.20% for CPII. At a correlation of -0.27, they often move in opposite directions. LIAM charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for CPII.

Performance

LIAM vs. CPII - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) and Ionic Inflation Protection ETF (CPII). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIAM achieves a 0.41% return, which is significantly lower than CPII's 2.97% return.

LIAM

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 0.41%
• 6M: 0.58%
• 1Y: 3.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CPII

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: 2.97%
• 6M: 2.83%
• 1Y: 3.20%
• 3Y*: 4.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LIAM vs. CPII - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LIAM LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF	0.41%	5.26%	-7.09%
CPII Ionic Inflation Protection ETF	2.97%	2.76%	3.43%

Correlation

The correlation between LIAM and CPII is -0.17, 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	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2024	-0.27

Return for Risk

LIAM vs. CPII — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIAM

LIAM Risk / Return Rank: 16
LIAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
LIAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
LIAM Omega Ratio Rank: 14
LIAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
LIAM Martin Ratio Rank: 16

CPII

CPII Risk / Return Rank: 30
CPII Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
CPII Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
CPII Omega Ratio Rank: 27
CPII Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
CPII Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

LIAM vs. CPII - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) and Ionic Inflation Protection ETF (CPII). 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.

	LIAM	CPII	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	0.94	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.74	1.36	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.18	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.70	1.96	-1.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.61	4.37	-2.76

LIAM vs. CPII - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIAM Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the CPII Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIAM and CPII, 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

LIAM vs. CPII - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIAM drawdown since its inception was -8.39%, which is greater than CPII's maximum drawdown of -6.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIAM and CPII.

Drawdown Indicators

	LIAM	CPII	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.39%	-6.40%	-1.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.45%	-1.64%	-2.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-4.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.53%	-1.64%	-0.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.32%	-1.61%	-1.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	0.73%	+1.19%

Volatility

LIAM vs. CPII - Volatility Comparison

LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) has a higher volatility of 1.82% compared to Ionic Inflation Protection ETF (CPII) at 0.76%. This indicates that LIAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPII based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LIAM	CPII	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.82%	0.76%	+1.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.67%	2.82%	+1.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.31%	3.42%	+2.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.64%	5.90%	+1.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.64%	5.90%	+1.74%

LIAM vs. CPII - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIAM has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CPII's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

LIAM vs. CPII - Dividend Comparison

LIAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.47%, more than CPII's 4.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CPII Ionic Inflation Protection ETF	4.10%	4.20%	5.47%	5.86%	2.21%
LIAM LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF	6.47%	9.02%	1.21%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LIAM and CPII in my portfolio?

LIAM and CPII have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LIAM or CPII?

LIAM has higher volatility (1.82%) compared to CPII (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIAM dropped -8.39% vs CPII's -6.40%.

Which ETF is better, LIAM or CPII?

On 1-year performance, CPII leads with 3.20% vs 3.08% for LIAM. On fees, LIAM is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CPII has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LIAM or CPII?

Over the 1-year period, CPII has performed better with a 3.20% return vs 3.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LIAM or CPII?

LIAM is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for CPII.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LIAM or CPII?

LIAM has the higher dividend yield at 6.47%, compared with 4.10% for CPII.

What is the main difference between LIAM and CPII?

They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and Ionic. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LIAM and 0.74% for CPII.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPII currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.94 vs 0.49), 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.