PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LTSTX vs. FRQHX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Principal LifeTime 2025 Fund (LTSTX) and Fidelity Managed Retirement 2010 Fund Class K6 (FRQHX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LTSTX having a 3.83% return and FRQHX slightly lower at 3.71%.


LTSTX

1D
-0.78%
1M
0.09%
YTD
3.83%
6M
3.33%
1Y
10.62%
3Y*
11.63%
5Y*
5.22%
10Y*
8.19%

FRQHX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.66%
YTD
3.71%
6M
3.52%
1Y
8.84%
3Y*
7.44%
5Y*
2.97%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
LTSTX
Principal LifeTime 2025 Fund
3.83%12.16%11.91%13.30%-15.23%10.91%13.70%5.56%
FRQHX
Fidelity Managed Retirement 2010 Fund Class K6
3.71%10.01%4.68%8.75%-12.22%4.04%9.80%3.95%

Correlation

The correlation between LTSTX and FRQHX is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2019

0.85

The correlation between LTSTX and FRQHX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - 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

LTSTX vs. FRQHX — Risk / Return Rank

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

LTSTX
LTSTX Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
LTSTX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LTSTX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
LTSTX Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
LTSTX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
LTSTX Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

FRQHX
FRQHX Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
FRQHX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRQHX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRQHX Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
FRQHX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRQHX Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Principal LifeTime 2025 Fund (LTSTX) and Fidelity Managed Retirement 2010 Fund Class K6 (FRQHX). 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.


LTSTXFRQHXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.95

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.45

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.18

2.88

-0.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.64

12.04

-2.40

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LTSTX Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the FRQHX Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LTSTX and FRQHX, 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

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LTSTX drawdown since its inception was -48.17%, which is greater than FRQHX's maximum drawdown of -16.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTSTX and FRQHX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LTSTXFRQHXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.17%

-16.90%

-31.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.24%

-3.41%

-1.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.12%

-5.15%

-2.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.01%

-16.90%

-4.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.30%

-0.41%

-0.89%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.14%

-3.77%

-2.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.18%

0.81%

+0.37%

Volatility

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Volatility Comparison

Principal LifeTime 2025 Fund (LTSTX) has a higher volatility of 2.86% compared to Fidelity Managed Retirement 2010 Fund Class K6 (FRQHX) at 2.04%. This indicates that LTSTX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRQHX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LTSTXFRQHXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.86%

2.04%

+0.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.92%

3.70%

+2.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.09%

4.36%

+2.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.24%

5.60%

+3.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.79%

5.77%

+4.02%

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LTSTX has a 0.01% expense ratio, which is lower than FRQHX's 0.26% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

LTSTX vs. FRQHX - Dividend Comparison

LTSTX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.74%, more than FRQHX's 3.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FRQHX
Fidelity Managed Retirement 2010 Fund Class K6
3.40%3.20%3.20%2.95%5.25%6.22%3.70%2.57%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LTSTX
Principal LifeTime 2025 Fund
11.74%12.19%9.74%4.26%8.00%7.66%5.25%6.91%6.39%4.75%3.65%8.91%

Frequently Asked Questions


LTSTX and FRQHX have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LTSTX has higher volatility (2.86%) compared to FRQHX (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTSTX dropped -48.17% vs FRQHX's -16.90%.

FRQHX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.62), 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 LTSTX and FRQHX

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