DBMF vs. IDTP.L
DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and IDTP.L (iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while IDTP.L is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD. DBMF is actively managed, while IDTP.L is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DBMF returned 8.01%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for IDTP.L. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for IDTP.L.
Performance
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 10.27% return, which is significantly higher than IDTP.L's 0.80% return.
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- -1.34%
- YTD
- 10.27%
- 6M
- 11.24%
- 1Y
- 26.94%
- 3Y*
- 9.64%
- 5Y*
- 8.01%
- 10Y*
- —
IDTP.L
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -0.27%
- YTD
- 0.80%
- 6M
- 1.51%
- 1Y
- 5.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.89%
- 5Y*
- 0.81%
- 10Y*
- 2.53%
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 10.27% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 21.61% | 11.49% | 1.80% | 10.51% |
IDTP.L iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.80% | 6.94% | 2.15% | 3.71% | -12.76% | 6.17% | 10.98% | 4.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between DBMF and IDTP.L is 0.10, 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 | 0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.20 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2019 | -0.12 |
The correlation between DBMF and IDTP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (5 years) to 0.10 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. IDTP.L — Risk / Return Rank
DBMF
IDTP.L
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IDTP.L). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| DBMF | IDTP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.21 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.50 | 2.37 | +2.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.30 | 6.53 | +9.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, smaller than the maximum IDTP.L drawdown of -39.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and IDTP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DBMF | IDTP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.39% | -39.19% | +18.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.10% | -1.92% | -4.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.60% | -4.51% | -11.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.39% | -15.12% | -5.27% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -15.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.91% | -0.90% | -1.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.56% | -4.24% | -2.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.68% | 0.70% | +0.98% |
Volatility
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Volatility Comparison
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a higher volatility of 2.71% compared to iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IDTP.L) at 1.32%. This indicates that DBMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IDTP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DBMF | IDTP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.71% | 1.32% | +1.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.00% | 2.66% | +7.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.35% | 3.78% | +8.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.55% | 6.13% | +6.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.41% | 6.37% | +6.04% |
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IDTP.L's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
DBMF vs. IDTP.L - Dividend Comparison
DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.19%, while IDTP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 5.19% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% |
IDTP.L iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DBMF and IDTP.L have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IDTP.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IDTP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while IDTP.L is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.12% for IDTP.L.
Find the right allocation for DBMF and IDTP.L
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