ALLW vs. DBMF
ALLW (State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ALLW is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by State Street, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ALLW returned 18.07% vs 27.46% for DBMF. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.
Performance
ALLW vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ALLW achieves a 6.55% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 11.55% return.
ALLW
- 1D
- 0.90%
- 1M
- -0.65%
- 6M
- 3.24%
- YTD
- 6.55%
- 1Y
- 18.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 1.16%
- 6M
- 8.64%
- YTD
- 11.55%
- 1Y
- 27.46%
- 3Y*
- 9.80%
- 5Y*
- 8.58%
- 10Y*
- —
ALLW vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 6.55% | 15.44% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 11.55% | 16.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between ALLW and DBMF is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2025 | 0.49 |
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
ALLW vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
ALLW
DBMF
ALLW vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). 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.
| ALLW | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.45 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.51 | 4.52 | -2.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.14 | 15.35 | -6.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ALLW vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ALLW drawdown since its inception was -8.78%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ALLW and DBMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ALLW | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.78% | -20.39% | +11.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.23% | -6.10% | -1.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.39% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.21% | -0.77% | -2.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.34% | -6.51% | +5.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.98% | 1.79% | +0.19% |
Volatility
ALLW vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) have volatilities of 2.86% and 2.80%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ALLW | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.86% | 2.80% | +0.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.32% | 10.12% | -0.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.12% | 12.61% | -1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.58% | 12.52% | +0.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.58% | 12.39% | +0.19% |
ALLW vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both ALLW and DBMF have an expense ratio of 0.85%.
Dividends
ALLW vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison
ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.39%, less than DBMF's 5.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 4.39% | 4.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 5.10% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ALLW and DBMF have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ALLW has higher volatility (2.86%) compared to DBMF (2.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ALLW dropped -8.78% vs DBMF's -20.39%.
On 1-year performance, DBMF leads with 27.46% vs 18.07% for ALLW. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 27.46% return vs 18.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ALLW and DBMF have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.
DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.10%, compared with 4.39% for ALLW.
ALLW is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iM Global Partners.
DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.63), 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.
Find the right allocation for ALLW and DBMF
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