CCOM.TO vs. DBMF
CCOM.TO (CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CCOM.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. CCOM.TO is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CCOM.TO returned 6.60%/yr vs 11.93%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CCOM.TO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CCOM.TO is traded in CAD, while DBMF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the DBMF values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CCOM.TO achieves a 14.12% return, which is significantly higher than DBMF's 13.35% return.
CCOM.TO
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- -1.57%
- YTD
- 14.12%
- 6M
- 13.88%
- 1Y
- 21.03%
- 3Y*
- 6.60%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 3.93%
- YTD
- 13.35%
- 6M
- 13.26%
- 1Y
- 32.52%
- 3Y*
- 11.93%
- 5Y*
- 11.46%
- 10Y*
- —
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units | 14.12% | 6.96% | 5.90% | -2.46% | 1.40% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 13.85% | 8.62% | 16.45% | -10.94% | -10.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between CCOM.TO and DBMF is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2022 | 0.05 |
The correlation between CCOM.TO and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
CCOM.TO
DBMF
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) 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.
| CCOM.TO | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.64 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.57 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.75 | 5.94 | -1.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.22 | 23.12 | -8.90 |
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
| CCOM.TO | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11 | 2.74 | -0.64 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.81 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.82 | 0.74 | +0.09 |
Drawdowns
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CCOM.TO drawdown since its inception was -9.79%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -21.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCOM.TO and DBMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CCOM.TO | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.79% | -21.86% | +12.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.45% | -5.50% | +1.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.18% | -13.56% | +5.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -21.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.45% | 0.00% | -4.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.96% | -7.45% | +4.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.48% | 1.41% | +0.07% |
Volatility
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.28%. This indicates that CCOM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CCOM.TO | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.71% | 2.28% | +2.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.36% | 9.30% | -0.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.02% | 11.91% | -1.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.42% | 14.20% | -5.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.42% | 13.59% | -5.17% |
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CCOM.TO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
CCOM.TO vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison
CCOM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.35%, more than DBMF's 5.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units | 7.35% | 3.48% | 6.99% | 4.21% | 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
CCOM.TO and DBMF have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CCOM.TO is cheaper at 0.73% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CCOM.TO is cheaper with a 0.73% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
CCOM.TO is categorized as Commodities, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: CI and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CCOM.TO and 0.85% for DBMF.
Find the right allocation for CCOM.TO 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