DBMF vs. QTR
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 10.81%/yr vs 22.93%/yr for QTR. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QTR.
Performance
DBMF vs. QTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 12.42% return, which is significantly lower than QTR's 17.64% return.
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.35%
- YTD
- 12.42%
- 6M
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 31.40%
- 3Y*
- 10.81%
- 5Y*
- 8.46%
- 10Y*
- —
QTR
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 10.52%
- YTD
- 17.64%
- 6M
- 15.72%
- 1Y
- 33.76%
- 3Y*
- 22.93%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF vs. QTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 12.42% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 21.61% | 1.76% |
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 17.64% | 14.52% | 21.46% | 45.53% | -29.94% | 4.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between DBMF and QTR is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021 | 0.07 |
Over the past year, DBMF and QTR have become more correlated (0.33) than their long-term average of 0.07, meaning their price movements have been converging.
DBMF vs. QTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DBMF
QTR
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
DBMF
QTR
Healthcare
DBMF
QTR
Financial Services
DBMF
QTR
Consumer Cyclical
DBMF
QTR
Communication Services
DBMF
QTR
Industrials
DBMF
QTR
Consumer Defensive
DBMF
QTR
Energy
DBMF
QTR
Real Estate
DBMF
QTR
Utilities
DBMF
QTR
Basic Materials
DBMF
QTR
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. QTR — Risk / Return Rank
DBMF
QTR
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.
| DBMF | QTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.41 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.17 | 2.76 | +2.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.07 | 9.47 | +9.59 |
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 | QTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.59 | 2.40 | +0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.77 | 0.68 | +0.09 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DBMF | QTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.24% | +0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -8.84% | +2.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.65% | 3.57% | -1.92% |
Volatility
DBMF vs. QTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is 2.12%, while Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a volatility of 4.52%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DBMF | QTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.12% | 4.52% | -2.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.76% | 10.68% | -0.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.17% | 14.14% | -1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.52% | 18.10% | -5.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.41% | 18.10% | -5.69% |
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 5.09%, less than QTR's 15.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 5.09% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% |
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 15.96% | 18.77% | 0.50% | 0.53% | 0.36% | 1.90% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DBMF and QTR have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QTR has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to DBMF (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs QTR's -31.72%.
On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 22.93% vs 10.81% for DBMF. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 22.93% return vs 10.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 5.09% for DBMF.
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.
DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.40), 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 QTR
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