LFAW vs QQQ
LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 103 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LFAW | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $4M | $455.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.25% | 0.41% | |
| Holdings | 23 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | -5.53% | +19.68% | |
| 1Y Return | -4.22% | +26.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +26.25% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.3% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -11.4% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | Stone Ridge Asset Management | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jan 8, 2024 | Mar 10, 1999 |
LFAW vs QQQ Performance
LifeX 2060 Longevity Income ETF (LFAW) is a ETF from Stone Ridge Asset Management and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year LFAW returned -4.22% while QQQ returned +26.75%. Year to date, LFAW is down 5.53% versus a gain of 19.68% for QQQ.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 8.3% for LFAW. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -11.4% for LFAW and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.14. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LFAW charges 0.25% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $18 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LFAW currently yields 6.25% against 0.41% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
LFAW and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 120 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LFAW or QQQ?
LFAW has an expense ratio of 0.25% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $7 per year of difference.
Which performed better, LFAW or QQQ?
Over the past year LFAW returned -4.22% vs +26.75% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), LFAW annualized -5.33% vs +13.15% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, LFAW or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 8.3% for LFAW. Worst drawdown: LFAW -11.4% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both LFAW and QQQ?
LFAW and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.14, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between LFAW and QQQ?
LFAW and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 120 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, LFAW or QQQ?
LFAW yields 6.25% while QQQ yields 0.41%, so LFAW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.