LIBD vs. LFAW

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

LIBD (LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF) and LFAW (LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LIBD is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by Stone Ridge, while LFAW is a Government Bonds fund actively managed by Stone Ridge. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LIBD returned -2.03% vs -0.98% for LFAW. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.

Performance

LIBD vs. LFAW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) and LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with LIBD having a -2.94% return and LFAW slightly higher at -2.91%.

LIBD

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: -3.26%
• 6M: -2.95%
• YTD: -2.94%
• 1Y: -2.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -2.29%

LFAW

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: -3.12%
• 6M: -2.87%
• YTD: -2.91%
• 1Y: -0.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -3.68%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF	$4.20K	$3.07K	$6.14K
LIBD LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF	$6.78K	$11.16K	$6.65K

LIBD vs. LFAW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LIBD LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF	-2.94%	-0.63%
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF	-2.91%	6.22%

Correlation

The correlation between LIBD and LFAW is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 6, 2025	0.92

The correlation between LIBD and LFAW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LIBD vs. LFAW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LIBD

LIBD Risk / Return Rank: 8
LIBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
LIBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
LIBD Omega Ratio Rank: 8
LIBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
LIBD Martin Ratio Rank: 8

LFAW

LFAW Risk / Return Rank: 11
LFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
LFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
LFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 10
LFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
LFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 11

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LIBD vs. LFAW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) and LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW). 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.

	LIBD	LFAW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.16	0.03	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.17	0.10	-0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.01	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.18	0.04	-0.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.38	0.08	-0.46

LIBD vs. LFAW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIBD Sharpe Ratio is -0.16, which is lower than the LFAW Sharpe Ratio of 0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIBD and LFAW, 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

LIBD vs. LFAW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIBD drawdown since its inception was -7.31%, smaller than the maximum LFAW drawdown of -11.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIBD and LFAW.

Drawdown Indicators

	LIBD	LFAW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.31%	-11.37%	+4.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.96%	-6.34%	-0.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.96%	-6.78%	-0.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.46%	-5.35%	+1.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.40%	2.83%	+0.57%

Volatility

LIBD vs. LFAW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) is 1.81%, while LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) has a volatility of 1.96%. This indicates that LIBD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFAW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LIBD	LFAW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.81%	1.96%	-0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.85%	5.66%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.85%	7.43%	+0.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.94%	8.87%	+1.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.94%	8.87%	+1.07%

LIBD vs. LFAW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LIBD and LFAW 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

LIBD vs. LFAW - Dividend Comparison

LIBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.89%, more than LFAW's 6.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LFAW LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF	6.61%	9.85%	1.47%
LIBD LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF	11.89%	13.52%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LIBD and LFAW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LIBD and LFAW 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.

Which is riskier, LIBD or LFAW?

LFAW has higher volatility (1.96%) compared to LIBD (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIBD dropped -7.31% vs LFAW's -11.37%.

Which ETF is better, LIBD or LFAW?

On 1-year performance, LFAW leads with -0.98% vs -2.03% for LIBD. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, LIBD has been the lower-risk option at 1.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LIBD or LFAW?

Over the 1-year period, LFAW has performed better with a -0.98% return vs -2.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LIBD or LFAW?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LIBD or LFAW?

LIBD has the higher dividend yield at 11.89%, compared with 6.61% for LFAW.

What is the main difference between LIBD and LFAW?

LIBD is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while LFAW is Government Bonds.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.03 vs -0.16), 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.