DBMF vs. FFUT

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT).

DBMF and FFUT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. DBMF is an actively managed fund by Litman Gregory Capital Partners LLC. It was launched on May 8, 2019. FFUT is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Jun 3, 2025.

Performance

DBMF vs. FFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

DBMF vs. FFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DBMF iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	7.87%	16.52%
FFUT Fidelity Managed Futures ETF	7.42%	8.26%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 7.87% return, which is significantly higher than FFUT's 7.42% return.

DBMF

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -3.82%
• YTD: 7.87%
• 6M: 15.44%
• 1Y: 26.29%
• 3Y*: 9.90%
• 5Y*: 8.63%
• 10Y*: —

FFUT

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 2.31%
• YTD: 7.42%
• 6M: 11.94%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DBMF vs. FFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FFUT's 0.80% expense ratio.

DBMF

iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF

FFUT

Fidelity Managed Futures ETF

Return for Risk

DBMF vs. FFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 95
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 95
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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. FFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). 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	FFUT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.98	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.25	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	18.51	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DBMF	FFUT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.19	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	1.86	-1.12

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and FFUT is 0.36, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

DBMF vs. FFUT - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.30%, more than FFUT's 1.95% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.30%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
FFUT Fidelity Managed Futures ETF	1.95%	2.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. FFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, which is greater than FFUT's maximum drawdown of -2.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and FFUT.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBMF	FFUT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.39%	-2.84%	-17.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.82%	-1.59%	-2.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.70%	-0.89%	-5.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.40%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DBMF	FFUT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.24%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.10%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.09%	11.01%	+1.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.66%	11.01%	+1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.48%	11.01%	+1.47%