DBMF vs. FLRT
DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and FLRT (Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while FLRT is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Pacific Life. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, DBMF returned 8.46%/yr vs 5.98%/yr for FLRT. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for FLRT.
Performance
DBMF vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison
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%
DBMF vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
Industrials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Technology
DBMF
FLRT
-
Healthcare
DBMF
FLRT
-
Financial Services
DBMF
FLRT
Consumer Cyclical
DBMF
FLRT
-
Communication Services
DBMF
FLRT
Industrials
DBMF
FLRT
-
Consumer Defensive
DBMF
FLRT
-
Energy
DBMF
FLRT
-
Real Estate
DBMF
FLRT
-
Utilities
DBMF
FLRT
-
Basic Materials
DBMF
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
DBMF
FLRT
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.
| DBMF | FLRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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 | FLRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| DBMF | FLRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.15% | +0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -1.41% | -5.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| DBMF | FLRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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