BUFB vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

BUFB (Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MerQube U.S. Large Cap Equity Buffer Laddered Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. BUFB is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUFB returned 14.83%/yr vs 8.63%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BUFB charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

BUFB vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFB achieves a 5.97% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 8.91% return.

BUFB

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -0.43%
• YTD: 5.97%
• 6M: 5.58%
• 1Y: 16.02%
• 3Y*: 14.83%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: -2.09%
• YTD: 8.91%
• 6M: 8.12%
• 1Y: 25.13%
• 3Y*: 8.63%
• 5Y*: 7.92%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFB vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BUFB Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF	5.97%	13.42%	16.37%	20.50%	-8.23%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	8.91%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.26%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFB and DBMF is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2022	0.02

Over the past year, BUFB and DBMF have become more correlated (0.27) than their long-term average of 0.02, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

BUFB vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFB

BUFB Risk / Return Rank: 78
BUFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BUFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BUFB Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BUFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
BUFB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 76
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 79
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

BUFB vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) 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.

	BUFB	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	2.02	+0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	2.68	+0.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.42	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	4.14	-0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.22	14.62	+1.60

BUFB vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFB and DBMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BUFB vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFB drawdown since its inception was -14.88%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFB and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFB	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.88%	-20.39%	+5.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.12%	-6.10%	+0.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.75%	-15.60%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.32%	-3.12%	+1.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.85%	-6.55%	+3.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	1.72%	-0.73%

Volatility

BUFB vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) is 2.53%, while iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 3.13%. This indicates that BUFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFB	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.53%	3.13%	-0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.17%	10.09%	-3.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.67%	12.48%	-4.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.98%	12.53%	-0.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.98%	12.41%	-0.43%

BUFB vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFB has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFB vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

BUFB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.25%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BUFB Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.25%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFB and DBMF in my portfolio?

BUFB and DBMF have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFB or DBMF?

DBMF has higher volatility (3.13%) compared to BUFB (2.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFB dropped -14.88% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, BUFB or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, BUFB leads with 14.83% vs 8.63% for DBMF. On fees, DBMF is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, BUFB has been the lower-risk option at 2.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFB or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, BUFB has performed better with a 14.83% return vs 8.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFB or DBMF?

DBMF is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for BUFB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFB or DBMF?

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.25%, compared with 0.00% for BUFB.

What is the main difference between BUFB and DBMF?

BUFB is categorized as Defined Outcome, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for BUFB and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 2.02), 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.