LIFT vs. SCHO
LIFT (LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF) and SCHO (Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. LIFT is actively managed, while SCHO is passively managed. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LIFT charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHO.
Performance
LIFT vs. SCHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LIFT achieves a 0.97% return, which is significantly higher than SCHO's 0.74% return.
LIFT
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- 6M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 0.97%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHO
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.07%
- 6M
- 0.78%
- YTD
- 0.74%
- 1Y
- 3.18%
- 3Y*
- 4.23%
- 5Y*
- 1.89%
- 10Y*
- 1.72%
LIFT vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LIFT LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF | 0.97% | 1.16% |
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 0.74% | 1.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between LIFT and SCHO is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.63 |
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
LIFT vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank
LIFT
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
SCHO
LIFT vs. SCHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF (LIFT) and Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO). 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.
| LIFT | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.46 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.71 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 15.65 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LIFT vs. SCHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LIFT drawdown since its inception was -0.49%, smaller than the maximum SCHO drawdown of -5.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIFT and SCHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LIFT | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.49% | -5.69% | +5.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.86% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -5.69% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -5.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.07% | -0.04% | -0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -0.61% | +0.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.20% | — |
Volatility
LIFT vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LIFT | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.49% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 1.02% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.25% | 1.41% | -0.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.25% | 2.00% | -0.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.25% | 1.56% | -0.31% |
LIFT vs. SCHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
LIFT has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHO's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
LIFT vs. SCHO - Dividend Comparison
LIFT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 35.64%, more than SCHO's 3.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LIFT LifeX 2028 Income Bucket ETF | 35.64% | 8.63% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 3.90% | 4.06% | 4.29% | 3.76% | 1.34% | 0.41% | 1.27% | 2.27% | 1.60% | 1.12% | 0.82% | 0.68% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LIFT and SCHO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SCHO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LIFT.
LIFT has the higher dividend yield at 35.64%, compared with 3.90% for SCHO.
They also come from different issuers: Stone Ridge and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LIFT and 0.03% for SCHO.
Find the right allocation for LIFT and SCHO
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