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

Performance

LIBD vs. LFDR - 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 Durable Income ETF (LFDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIBD achieves a -2.94% return, which is significantly higher than LFDR's -3.22% return.


LIBD

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

LFDR

1D
-0.73%
1M
-3.47%
6M
-3.17%
YTD
-3.22%
1Y
-1.91%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-0.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.83K$1.96K$2.51K
$6.78K$11.16K$6.65K

LIBD vs. LFDR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LIBD and LFDR is 0.93, 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.

0.93

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

0.93

The correlation between LIBD and LFDR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - 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

LIBD vs. LFDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIBD
LIBD Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
LIBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LIBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
LIBD Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
LIBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
LIBD Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

LFDR
LFDR Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
LFDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LFDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
LFDR Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
LFDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
LFDR Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
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. LFDR - 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 Durable Income ETF (LFDR). 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.


LIBDLFDRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

0.99

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.18

-0.10

-0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.38

-0.22

-0.16

LIBD vs. LFDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIBD Sharpe Ratio is -0.16, which is lower than the LFDR Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIBD and LFDR, 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

LIBD vs. LFDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIBD drawdown since its inception was -7.31%, smaller than the maximum LFDR drawdown of -7.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIBD and LFDR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LIBDLFDRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.31%

-7.77%

+0.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.96%

-6.84%

-0.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.96%

-6.84%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.46%

-3.07%

-0.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.40%

3.06%

+0.34%

Volatility

LIBD vs. LFDR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) is 1.81%, while LifeX Durable Income ETF (LFDR) has a volatility of 2.14%. This indicates that LIBD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LIBDLFDRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.81%

2.14%

-0.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.85%

6.06%

-0.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.85%

8.09%

-0.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.94%

9.47%

+0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.94%

9.47%

+0.47%

LIBD vs. LFDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LIBD and LFDR 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. LFDR - Dividend Comparison

LIBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.89%, more than LFDR's 8.50% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, LIBD and LFDR 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.

LFDR has higher volatility (2.14%) compared to LIBD (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIBD dropped -7.31% vs LFDR's -7.77%.

On 1-year performance, LFDR leads with -1.91% 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.

Over the 1-year period, LFDR has performed better with a -1.91% return vs -2.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

LIBD has the higher dividend yield at 11.89%, compared with 8.50% for LFDR.

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

LFDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.08 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LIBD and LFDR

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