CRSP vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CRSP (CRISPR Therapeutics AG) is a stock, while DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) is Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Over the past 5 years, CRSP returned -17.10%/yr vs 7.97%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CRSP vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP) 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, CRSP achieves a 2.96% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 9.37% return.

CRSP

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 7.21%
• YTD: 2.96%
• 6M: -4.37%
• 1Y: 18.53%
• 3Y*: -1.23%
• 5Y*: -17.10%
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -1.67%
• YTD: 9.37%
• 6M: 8.47%
• 1Y: 26.10%
• 3Y*: 8.78%
• 5Y*: 7.97%
• 10Y*: —

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

CRSP vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CRSP CRISPR Therapeutics AG	2.96%	33.23%	-37.12%	54.00%	-46.36%	-50.51%	151.39%	55.53%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	9.37%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	11.49%	1.80%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between CRSP and DBMF is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.12
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2019	0.06

The correlation between CRSP and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (5 years) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CRSP vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRSP

CRSP Risk / Return Rank: 52
CRSP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
CRSP Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
CRSP Omega Ratio Rank: 51
CRSP Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
CRSP Martin Ratio Rank: 51

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 74
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

CRSP vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP) 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.

	CRSP	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	2.10	-1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.90	2.77	-1.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.44	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.44	4.30	-3.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.72	15.28	-14.57

CRSP vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRSP Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRSP 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

CRSP vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRSP drawdown since its inception was -85.11%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRSP and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRSP	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.11%	-20.39%	-64.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-42.25%	-6.10%	-36.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-64.91%	-15.60%	-49.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-80.68%	-20.39%	-60.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-74.30%	-2.71%	-71.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-49.30%	-6.55%	-42.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.94%	1.71%	+24.23%

Volatility

CRSP vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP) has a higher volatility of 17.81% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 3.11%. This indicates that CRSP'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.

Volatility by Period

	CRSP	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.81%	3.11%	+14.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	43.95%	10.14%	+33.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	62.58%	12.47%	+50.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.72%	12.53%	+48.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	64.30%	12.41%	+51.89%

Dividends

CRSP vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

CRSP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.23%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CRSP CRISPR Therapeutics AG	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.23%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRSP and DBMF in my portfolio?

CRSP and DBMF have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CRSP or DBMF?

CRSP has higher volatility (17.81%) compared to DBMF (3.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRSP dropped -85.11% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 0.30), 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.