BUFB vs. DBMF
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 15.74%/yr vs 10.81%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BUFB charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
BUFB vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BUFB achieves a 7.03% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 12.42% return.
BUFB
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 2.46%
- YTD
- 7.03%
- 6M
- 7.78%
- 1Y
- 19.07%
- 3Y*
- 15.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.35%
- YTD
- 12.42%
- 6M
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 31.40%
- 3Y*
- 10.81%
- 5Y*
- 8.46%
- 10Y*
- —
BUFB vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFB Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF | 7.03% | 13.42% | 16.37% | 20.50% | -8.37% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 12.42% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 20.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between BUFB and DBMF is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2022 | 0.01 |
Over the past year, BUFB and DBMF have become more correlated (0.23) than their long-term average of 0.01, meaning their price movements have been converging.
BUFB vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BUFB
DBMF
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
BUFB
DBMF
Financial Services
BUFB
DBMF
Communication Services
BUFB
DBMF
Consumer Cyclical
BUFB
DBMF
Healthcare
BUFB
DBMF
Industrials
BUFB
DBMF
Consumer Defensive
BUFB
DBMF
Energy
BUFB
DBMF
Utilities
BUFB
DBMF
Real Estate
BUFB
DBMF
Basic Materials
BUFB
DBMF
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
BUFB vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
BUFB
DBMF
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.
| BUFB | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.55 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.74 | 5.17 | -1.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.82 | 19.07 | +0.75 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BUFB | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.55 | 2.59 | -0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.68 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.91 | 0.77 | +0.14 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BUFB | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.31% | 0.00% | -0.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.88% | -6.59% | +3.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.96% | 1.65% | -0.69% |
Volatility
BUFB vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) is 1.33%, while iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 2.12%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BUFB | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.33% | 2.12% | -0.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.76% | 9.76% | -4.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.51% | 12.17% | -4.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.01% | 12.52% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.01% | 12.41% | -0.40% |
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 5.09%.
| 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 | 5.09% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BUFB and DBMF have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DBMF has higher volatility (2.12%) compared to BUFB (1.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFB dropped -14.88% vs DBMF's -20.39%.
On 3-year performance, BUFB leads with 15.74% vs 10.81% for DBMF. On fees, DBMF is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, BUFB has been the lower-risk option at 1.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BUFB has performed better with a 15.74% return vs 10.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DBMF is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for BUFB.
DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.09%, compared with 0.00% for BUFB.
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.
DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.55), 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 BUFB 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