PHTNX vs. PLTNX
Compare and contrast key facts about Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2030 Fund (PHTNX) and Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2055 Fund (PLTNX).
PHTNX is managed by Principal. It was launched on Sep 29, 2014. PLTNX is managed by Principal. It was launched on Sep 29, 2014.
Performance
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PHTNX Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2030 Fund | -2.64% | 14.41% | 11.06% | 14.92% | -16.76% | 13.88% | 14.74% | 20.92% | -7.30% | 16.81% |
PLTNX Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2055 Fund | -4.53% | 19.89% | 17.25% | 20.33% | -18.49% | 19.70% | 15.78% | 26.17% | -9.84% | 21.03% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PHTNX achieves a -2.64% return, which is significantly higher than PLTNX's -4.53% return. Over the past 10 years, PHTNX has underperformed PLTNX with an annualized return of 7.95%, while PLTNX has yielded a comparatively higher 10.48% annualized return.
PHTNX
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- -5.60%
- YTD
- -2.64%
- 6M
- -0.56%
- 1Y
- 11.30%
- 3Y*
- 10.51%
- 5Y*
- 5.40%
- 10Y*
- 7.95%
PLTNX
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- -8.15%
- YTD
- -4.53%
- 6M
- -1.63%
- 1Y
- 16.31%
- 3Y*
- 14.86%
- 5Y*
- 8.25%
- 10Y*
- 10.48%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both PHTNX and PLTNX have an expense ratio of 0.05%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Return for Risk
PHTNX vs. PLTNX — Risk / Return Rank
PHTNX
PLTNX
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2030 Fund (PHTNX) and Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2055 Fund (PLTNX). 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.
| PHTNX | PLTNX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.15 | 1.02 | +0.13 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.68 | 1.54 | +0.14 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.22 | +0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.37 | 1.22 | +0.15 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.61 | 6.15 | +0.46 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PHTNX | PLTNX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.15 | 1.02 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.54 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 | 0.67 | +0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.65 | 0.61 | +0.04 |
Correlation
The correlation between PHTNX and PLTNX is 0.98, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Dividend Comparison
PHTNX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.74%, less than PLTNX's 4.81% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PHTNX Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2030 Fund | 4.74% | 4.62% | 3.71% | 3.42% | 8.05% | 5.40% | 4.44% | 3.70% | 3.79% | 2.52% | 2.28% | 1.68% |
PLTNX Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2055 Fund | 4.81% | 4.59% | 4.40% | 2.84% | 9.11% | 4.23% | 3.11% | 3.47% | 4.68% | 2.21% | 1.99% | 1.63% |
Drawdowns
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PHTNX drawdown since its inception was -24.52%, smaller than the maximum PLTNX drawdown of -32.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PHTNX and PLTNX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| PHTNX | PLTNX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.52% | -32.71% | +8.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -11.90% | +4.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.06% | -25.48% | +3.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.52% | -32.71% | +8.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.79% | -8.66% | +2.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.03% | -4.83% | +0.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.59% | 2.36% | -0.77% |
Volatility
PHTNX vs. PLTNX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2030 Fund (PHTNX) is 3.32%, while Principal LifeTime Hybrid 2055 Fund (PLTNX) has a volatility of 5.01%. This indicates that PHTNX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PLTNX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| PHTNX | PLTNX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.32% | 5.01% | -1.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.68% | 9.07% | -3.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.04% | 16.20% | -6.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.49% | 15.39% | -4.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.20% | 15.77% | -4.57% |