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

Performance

DBMF vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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 lower than EMXC's 32.33% return.


DBMF

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

EMXC

1D
2.43%
1M
-1.88%
YTD
32.33%
6M
36.39%
1Y
62.72%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
11.46%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBMF vs. EMXC - 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%
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
32.33%35.14%2.68%18.96%-19.56%8.54%12.76%8.68%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and EMXC is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.42

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

0.26

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

0.10

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

0.16

Over the past year, DBMF and EMXC have become more correlated (0.42) than their long-term average of 0.16, meaning their price movements have been converging.

DBMF vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
DBMF
EMXC

Technology

29.8%
45.0%

Healthcare

12.7%
2.2%

Financial Services

12.5%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
4.5%

Communication Services

8.6%
3.4%

Industrials

8.4%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.1%
2.9%

Energy

3.9%
4.2%

Real Estate

2.5%
1.0%

Utilities

2.3%
2.3%

Basic Materials

2.2%
6.8%

Technology

DBMF
29.8%
EMXC
45.0%

Healthcare

DBMF
12.7%
EMXC
2.2%

Financial Services

DBMF
12.5%
EMXC
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

DBMF
11.0%
EMXC
4.5%

Communication Services

DBMF
8.6%
EMXC
3.4%

Industrials

DBMF
8.4%
EMXC
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

DBMF
6.1%
EMXC
2.9%

Energy

DBMF
3.9%
EMXC
4.2%

Real Estate

DBMF
2.5%
EMXC
1.0%

Utilities

DBMF
2.3%
EMXC
2.3%

Basic Materials

DBMF
2.2%
EMXC
6.8%

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. EMXC — 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

EMXC
EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.


DBMFEMXCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.50

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.78

4.37

+0.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.53

17.27

+0.26

DBMF vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and EMXC, 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


DBMFEMXCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.36

2.71

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

0.65

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.75

0.50

+0.25

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and EMXC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBMFEMXCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.39%

-42.81%

+22.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.10%

-14.41%

+8.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.60%

-19.12%

+3.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

-28.91%

+8.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.75%

-7.55%

+5.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.58%

-10.19%

+3.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.66%

3.64%

-1.98%

Volatility

DBMF vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is 2.94%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.57%. This indicates that DBMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBMFEMXCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.94%

12.57%

-9.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.01%

21.20%

-11.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.38%

23.27%

-10.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.56%

17.82%

-5.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.43%

19.99%

-7.56%

DBMF vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBMF vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%, more than EMXC's 2.13% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
2.13%2.82%2.69%1.83%2.85%1.78%1.45%3.25%2.63%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


DBMF and EMXC have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMXC has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to DBMF (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 11.46% vs 7.92% for DBMF. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 11.46% return vs 7.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 2.13% for EMXC.

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while EMXC is Emerging Markets Equities. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.49% for EMXC.

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.36), 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 EMXC

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