PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LIAM vs. LIBD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LIAM vs. LIBD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) and LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIAM achieves a 0.41% return, which is significantly lower than LIBD's 0.49% return.


LIAM

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

LIBD

1D
-0.86%
1M
1.00%
YTD
0.49%
6M
0.63%
1Y
2.32%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LIAM vs. LIBD - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LIAM and LIBD is 0.98 - 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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 6, 2025

0.97

The correlation between LIAM and LIBD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - 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

LIAM vs. LIBD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIAM
LIAM Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
LIAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIAM Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
LIAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIAM Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

LIBD
LIBD Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
LIBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIBD Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
LIBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIBD Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

LIAM vs. LIBD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) and LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD). 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.


LIAMLIBDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.05

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.70

0.38

+0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.61

0.78

+0.84

LIAM vs. LIBD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIAM Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is higher than the LIBD Sharpe Ratio of 0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIAM and LIBD, 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

LIAM vs. LIBD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIAM drawdown since its inception was -8.39%, which is greater than LIBD's maximum drawdown of -7.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIAM and LIBD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LIAMLIBDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.39%

-7.31%

-1.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.45%

-6.19%

+1.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.53%

-3.69%

+1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.32%

-3.35%

+0.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.92%

2.99%

-1.07%

Volatility

LIAM vs. LIBD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LifeX 2055 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIAM) is 1.82%, while LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) has a volatility of 2.03%. This indicates that LIAM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LIBD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LIAMLIBDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.82%

2.03%

-0.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.67%

5.79%

-1.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.31%

7.93%

-1.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.64%

10.10%

-2.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.64%

10.10%

-2.46%

LIAM vs. LIBD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LIAM and LIBD 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

LIAM vs. LIBD - Dividend Comparison

LIAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.47%, less than LIBD's 11.50% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, LIAM and LIBD 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.

LIBD has higher volatility (2.03%) compared to LIAM (1.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIAM dropped -8.39% vs LIBD's -7.31%.

On 1-year performance, LIAM leads with 3.08% vs 2.32% for LIBD. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, LIAM has been the lower-risk option at 1.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LIAM has performed better with a 3.08% return vs 2.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LIAM and LIBD have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

LIBD has the higher dividend yield at 11.50%, compared with 6.47% for LIAM.

LIAM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.49 vs 0.29), 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 LIAM and LIBD

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