DBMF vs. CMDT
DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and CMDT (PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while CMDT is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Roll Select Commodity Total Return Index. DBMF is actively managed, while CMDT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DBMF returned 10.81%/yr vs 16.90%/yr for CMDT. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CMDT.
Performance
DBMF vs. CMDT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 12.42% return, which is significantly lower than CMDT's 23.96% return.
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.35%
- YTD
- 12.42%
- 6M
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 31.40%
- 3Y*
- 10.81%
- 5Y*
- 8.46%
- 10Y*
- —
CMDT
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -0.63%
- YTD
- 23.96%
- 6M
- 24.09%
- 1Y
- 35.85%
- 3Y*
- 16.90%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF vs. CMDT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 12.42% | 13.85% | 7.24% | 0.07% |
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 23.96% | 12.78% | 6.93% | 5.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between DBMF and CMDT is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023 | 0.31 |
The correlation between DBMF and CMDT shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (all time) to 0.44 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
DBMF vs. CMDT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DBMF
CMDT
Technology
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Industrials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Technology
DBMF
CMDT
-
Healthcare
DBMF
CMDT
-
Financial Services
DBMF
CMDT
Consumer Cyclical
DBMF
CMDT
-
Communication Services
DBMF
CMDT
-
Industrials
DBMF
CMDT
-
Consumer Defensive
DBMF
CMDT
-
Energy
DBMF
CMDT
-
Real Estate
DBMF
CMDT
-
Utilities
DBMF
CMDT
-
Basic Materials
DBMF
CMDT
-
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. CMDT — Risk / Return Rank
DBMF
CMDT
DBMF vs. CMDT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT). 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.
| DBMF | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.50 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.17 | 8.03 | -2.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.07 | 22.12 | -3.05 |
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
| DBMF | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.59 | 2.92 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.77 | 1.32 | -0.55 |
Drawdowns
DBMF vs. CMDT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, which is greater than CMDT's maximum drawdown of -9.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and CMDT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DBMF | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.39% | -9.69% | -10.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.10% | -4.49% | -1.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.60% | -9.69% | -5.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.39% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.86% | +2.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -2.69% | -3.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.65% | 1.63% | +0.02% |
Volatility
DBMF vs. CMDT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is 2.12%, while PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that DBMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMDT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DBMF | CMDT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.12% | 4.33% | -2.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.76% | 10.30% | -0.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.17% | 12.35% | -0.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.52% | 12.21% | +0.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.41% | 12.21% | +0.20% |
DBMF vs. CMDT - Expense Ratio Comparison
DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CMDT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
DBMF vs. CMDT - Dividend Comparison
DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, more than CMDT's 2.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMDT PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund | 2.44% | 3.04% | 8.80% | 2.71% | 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
DBMF and CMDT have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CMDT has higher volatility (4.33%) compared to DBMF (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs CMDT's -9.69%.
On 3-year performance, CMDT leads with 16.90% vs 10.81% for DBMF. On fees, CMDT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CMDT has performed better with a 16.90% return vs 10.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMDT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.09%, compared with 2.44% for CMDT.
DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while CMDT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.65% for CMDT.
CMDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.59), 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 DBMF and CMDT
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