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

Performance

LIBD vs. RINF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) and ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF (RINF). 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 lower than RINF's 3.18% return.


LIBD

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

RINF

1D
0.46%
1M
1.46%
6M
2.89%
YTD
3.18%
1Y
4.68%
3Y*
3.98%
5Y*
5.76%
10Y*
4.81%
ALL TIME*
1.02%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$6.78K$11.16K$6.65K
$118.15K$123.66K$133.91K

LIBD vs. RINF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LIBD and RINF is -0.24, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.24

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

-0.31

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. RINF — 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

RINF
RINF Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
RINF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RINF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
RINF Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
RINF Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
RINF Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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. RINF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


LIBDRINFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.15

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.18

1.64

-1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.38

4.07

-4.45

LIBD vs. RINF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIBD Sharpe Ratio is -0.16, which is lower than the RINF Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIBD and RINF, 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. RINF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIBD drawdown since its inception was -7.31%, smaller than the maximum RINF drawdown of -43.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIBD and RINF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LIBDRINFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.31%

-43.51%

+36.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.96%

-2.29%

-4.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.96%

0.00%

-6.96%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.46%

-16.28%

+12.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.40%

0.93%

+2.47%

Volatility

LIBD vs. RINF - Volatility Comparison

LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF (LIBD) has a higher volatility of 1.81% compared to ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF (RINF) at 1.48%. This indicates that LIBD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RINF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LIBDRINFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.81%

1.48%

+0.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.85%

3.13%

+2.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.85%

4.33%

+3.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.94%

12.51%

-2.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.94%

12.54%

-2.60%

LIBD vs. RINF - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIBD has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than RINF's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

LIBD vs. RINF - Dividend Comparison

LIBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.89%, more than RINF's 3.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LIBD
LifeX 2065 Inflation-Protected Longevity Income ETF
11.89%13.52%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RINF
ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF
3.63%3.89%4.68%5.07%1.15%2.76%0.82%1.90%2.47%2.99%1.09%1.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


LIBD and RINF have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LIBD has higher volatility (1.81%) compared to RINF (1.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIBD dropped -7.31% vs RINF's -43.51%.

On 1-year performance, RINF leads with 4.68% vs -2.03% for LIBD. On fees, LIBD is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, RINF has been the lower-risk option at 1.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RINF has performed better with a 4.68% return vs -2.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LIBD is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for RINF.

LIBD has the higher dividend yield at 11.89%, compared with 3.63% for RINF.

They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LIBD and 0.30% for RINF.

RINF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 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 RINF

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