PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DBMF vs. BND
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DBMF vs. BND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 10.45% return, which is significantly higher than BND's -0.07% return.


DBMF

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

BND

1D
-0.03%
1M
-0.67%
YTD
-0.07%
6M
0.23%
1Y
4.87%
3Y*
3.89%
5Y*
-0.05%
10Y*
1.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBMF vs. BND - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
10.45%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%11.49%1.80%10.67%
BND
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF
-0.07%7.08%1.38%5.65%-13.11%-1.86%7.71%5.54%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and BND is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.21

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2019

-0.21

The correlation between DBMF and BND shifts across timeframes, from -0.36 (5 years) to 0.11 (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

DBMF vs. BND — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

BND
BND Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
BND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
BND Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
BND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
BND Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

DBMF vs. BND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND). 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.


DBMFBNDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.23

+0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.78

1.83

+2.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.53

5.43

+12.10

DBMF vs. BND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is higher than the BND Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and BND, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DBMFBNDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.36

1.32

+1.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

-0.01

+0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.75

0.58

+0.17

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. BND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, which is greater than BND's maximum drawdown of -18.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and BND.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBMFBNDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.39%

-18.58%

-1.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.10%

-2.68%

-3.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.60%

-5.92%

-9.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

-17.91%

-2.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.75%

-2.70%

+0.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.58%

-3.06%

-3.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.66%

0.90%

+0.76%

Volatility

DBMF vs. BND - Volatility Comparison

iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a higher volatility of 2.94% compared to Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) at 1.20%. This indicates that DBMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBMFBNDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.94%

1.20%

+1.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.01%

2.69%

+7.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.38%

3.72%

+8.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.56%

6.02%

+6.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.43%

5.53%

+6.90%

DBMF vs. BND - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BND's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBMF vs. BND - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%, more than BND's 3.98% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BND
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF
3.98%3.86%3.67%3.09%2.60%2.12%2.38%2.72%2.81%2.54%2.51%2.57%
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.18%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


DBMF and BND have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBMF has higher volatility (2.94%) compared to BND (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs BND's -18.58%.

On 5-year performance, DBMF leads with 7.92% vs -0.05% for BND. On fees, BND is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BND has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 7.92% return vs -0.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BND is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 3.98% for BND.

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while BND is Total Bond Market. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.03% for BND.

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 1.32), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DBMF and BND

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