CAOS vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAOS returned 4.15%/yr vs 10.02%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CAOS charges 0.63%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

CAOS vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) 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, CAOS achieves a 0.81% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 10.45% return.

CAOS

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 0.81%
• 6M: 0.65%
• 1Y: 1.88%
• 3Y*: 4.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: 10.45%
• 6M: 12.63%
• 1Y: 29.05%
• 3Y*: 10.02%
• 5Y*: 7.92%
• 10Y*: —

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

CAOS vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.81%	2.55%	5.33%	7.97%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	10.45%	13.85%	7.24%	-7.73%

Correlation

The correlation between CAOS and DBMF is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2023	0.01

The correlation between CAOS and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CAOS vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAOS	DBMF
Technology	33.1%	29.8%
Financial Services	12.4%	12.5%
Communication Services	10.4%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	11.0%
Healthcare	9.6%	12.7%
Industrials	8.5%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	6.1%
Energy	4.1%	3.9%
Utilities	2.6%	2.3%
Real Estate	2.0%	2.5%
Basic Materials	1.9%	2.2%

Return for Risk

CAOS vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 45
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 42

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 84
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 88
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

CAOS vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) 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.

	CAOS	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	2.36	-1.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	3.08	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.50	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.49	4.78	-2.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.17	17.53	-11.36
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAOS vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAOS Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAOS 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CAOS	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	2.36	-1.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.21	0.75	+0.46

Drawdowns

CAOS vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAOS drawdown since its inception was -3.60%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAOS and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAOS	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.60%	-20.39%	+16.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.76%	-6.10%	+5.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.60%	-15.60%	+12.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.08%	-1.75%	+0.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-6.58%	+5.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.31%	1.66%	-1.35%

Volatility

CAOS vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) is 0.29%, while iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 2.94%. This indicates that CAOS 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

	CAOS	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.29%	2.94%	-2.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.04%	10.01%	-8.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.53%	12.38%	-10.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.25%	12.56%	-8.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.25%	12.43%	-8.18%

CAOS vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAOS has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAOS vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.18%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAOS and DBMF in my portfolio?

CAOS and DBMF have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAOS or DBMF?

DBMF has higher volatility (2.94%) compared to CAOS (0.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAOS dropped -3.60% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, CAOS or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, DBMF leads with 10.02% vs 4.15% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAOS or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 10.02% return vs 4.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAOS or DBMF?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between CAOS and DBMF?

CAOS is categorized as Options Trading, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for CAOS and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 1.23), 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.