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

Performance

DBMF vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). 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 12.42% return, which is significantly higher than FLRT's 1.83% return.


DBMF

1D
0.03%
1M
2.35%
YTD
12.42%
6M
14.20%
1Y
31.40%
3Y*
10.81%
5Y*
8.46%
10Y*

FLRT

1D
-0.15%
1M
0.90%
YTD
1.83%
6M
2.55%
1Y
6.08%
3Y*
8.90%
5Y*
5.98%
10Y*
5.00%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBMF vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
12.42%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%11.49%1.80%10.67%
FLRT
Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF
1.83%6.24%9.18%14.59%-2.72%3.18%2.78%3.23%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and FLRT is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.09

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

-0.04

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

-0.07

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

-0.02

DBMF vs. FLRT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
DBMF
FLRT

Technology

29.8%

-

Healthcare

12.7%

-

Financial Services

12.5%
99.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%

-

Communication Services

8.6%
0.8%

Industrials

8.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.1%

-

Energy

3.9%

-

Real Estate

2.5%

-

Utilities

2.3%

-

Basic Materials

2.2%

-

Technology

DBMF
29.8%
FLRT

-

Healthcare

DBMF
12.7%
FLRT

-

Financial Services

DBMF
12.5%
FLRT
99.2%

Consumer Cyclical

DBMF
11.0%
FLRT

-

Communication Services

DBMF
8.6%
FLRT
0.8%

Industrials

DBMF
8.4%
FLRT

-

Consumer Defensive

DBMF
6.1%
FLRT

-

Energy

DBMF
3.9%
FLRT

-

Real Estate

DBMF
2.5%
FLRT

-

Utilities

DBMF
2.3%
FLRT

-

Basic Materials

DBMF
2.2%
FLRT

-

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. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

FLRT
FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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. FLRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). 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.


DBMFFLRTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.95

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.17

3.43

+1.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.07

12.62

+6.44

DBMF vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is lower than the FLRT Sharpe Ratio of 3.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and FLRT, 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


DBMFFLRTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.59

3.89

-1.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

2.61

-1.93

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.77

0.75

+0.02

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, roughly equal to the maximum FLRT drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and FLRT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBMFFLRTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.39%

-20.96%

+0.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.10%

-1.78%

-4.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.60%

-2.87%

-12.73%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

-7.60%

-12.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.15%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.59%

-1.41%

-5.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.65%

0.48%

+1.17%

Volatility

DBMF vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison

iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a higher volatility of 2.12% compared to Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) at 0.40%. This indicates that DBMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBMFFLRTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.12%

0.40%

+1.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.76%

1.19%

+8.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.17%

1.57%

+10.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.52%

2.30%

+10.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.41%

6.17%

+6.24%

DBMF vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FLRT's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBMF vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, less than FLRT's 6.81% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.09%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FLRT
Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF
6.81%6.93%7.93%8.40%5.81%3.16%3.52%4.30%3.95%3.20%3.38%3.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


DBMF and FLRT have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBMF has higher volatility (2.12%) compared to FLRT (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs FLRT's -20.96%.

On 5-year performance, DBMF leads with 8.46% vs 5.98% for FLRT. On fees, FLRT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. 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 8.46% return vs 5.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLRT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

FLRT has the higher dividend yield at 6.81%, compared with 5.09% for DBMF.

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while FLRT is High Yield Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Pacific Life. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.69% for FLRT.

FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.89 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DBMF and FLRT

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