DBMF vs. QTR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index. DBMF is actively managed, while QTR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DBMF returned 8.63%/yr vs 20.47%/yr for QTR. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QTR.

Performance

DBMF vs. QTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly lower than QTR's 13.24% return.

DBMF

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: -2.09%
• YTD: 8.91%
• 6M: 8.12%
• 1Y: 25.13%
• 3Y*: 8.63%
• 5Y*: 7.92%
• 10Y*: —

QTR

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: -0.22%
• YTD: 13.24%
• 6M: 11.57%
• 1Y: 26.33%
• 3Y*: 20.47%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DBMF vs. QTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	8.91%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	1.35%
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	13.24%	14.52%	21.46%	45.53%	-29.94%	4.16%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and QTR is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.08

Over the past year, DBMF and QTR have become more correlated (0.39) than their long-term average of 0.08, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

DBMF vs. QTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 76
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 79
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QTR

QTR Risk / Return Rank: 51
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 53
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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. QTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR). 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	QTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	1.66	+0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.68	2.26	+0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.30	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.14	2.15	+1.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.62	7.19	+7.43

DBMF vs. QTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the QTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and QTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. QTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, smaller than the maximum QTR drawdown of -31.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and QTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBMF	QTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.39%	-31.72%	+11.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.10%	-12.29%	+6.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.60%	-18.99%	+3.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.12%	-3.98%	+0.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.55%	-8.77%	+2.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.72%	3.67%	-1.95%

Volatility

DBMF vs. QTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is 3.13%, while Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a volatility of 8.37%. This indicates that DBMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DBMF	QTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.13%	8.37%	-5.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.09%	12.84%	-2.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.48%	15.97%	-3.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.53%	18.34%	-5.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.41%	18.34%	-5.93%

DBMF vs. QTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QTR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBMF vs. QTR - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.25%, less than QTR's 16.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.25%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	16.58%	18.77%	0.50%	0.53%	0.36%	1.90%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBMF and QTR in my portfolio?

DBMF and QTR have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DBMF or QTR?

QTR has higher volatility (8.37%) compared to DBMF (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs QTR's -31.72%.

Which ETF is better, DBMF or QTR?

On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 20.47% vs 8.63% for DBMF. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DBMF or QTR?

Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 20.47% return vs 8.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DBMF or QTR?

QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DBMF or QTR?

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 16.58%, compared with 5.25% for DBMF.

What is the main difference between DBMF and QTR?

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while QTR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.60% for QTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.66), 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.