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

Performance

DBMF vs. RODM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM). 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 10.48% return, which is significantly lower than RODM's 11.64% return.


DBMF

1D
0.19%
1M
-1.12%
YTD
10.48%
6M
11.61%
1Y
27.18%
3Y*
9.37%
5Y*
8.18%
10Y*

RODM

1D
-0.53%
1M
0.90%
YTD
11.64%
6M
12.64%
1Y
25.47%
3Y*
19.57%
5Y*
9.73%
10Y*
9.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBMF vs. RODM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
10.48%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%11.49%1.80%10.51%
RODM
Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF
11.64%34.42%8.02%15.76%-14.54%11.11%-0.62%8.07%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and RODM is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.34

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

0.20

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

0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2019

0.14

The correlation between DBMF and RODM shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (5 years) to 0.34 (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. RODM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

RODM
RODM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
RODM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RODM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RODM Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
RODM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
RODM Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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. RODM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM). 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.


DBMFRODMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.42

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.48

3.60

+0.87

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.18

14.32

+1.86

DBMF vs. RODM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the RODM Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and RODM, 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...

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. RODM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, smaller than the maximum RODM drawdown of -35.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and RODM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBMFRODMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.39%

-35.98%

+15.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.10%

-7.10%

+1.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.60%

-10.58%

-5.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

-28.85%

+8.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.72%

-0.84%

-0.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.56%

-6.36%

-0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.68%

1.78%

-0.10%

Volatility

DBMF vs. RODM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is 2.68%, while Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) has a volatility of 3.58%. This indicates that DBMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RODM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBMFRODMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.68%

3.58%

-0.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.00%

8.77%

+1.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.37%

11.01%

+1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.55%

13.48%

-0.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.41%

15.22%

-2.81%

DBMF vs. RODM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than RODM's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBMF vs. RODM - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%, more than RODM's 2.78% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.18%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RODM
Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF
2.78%3.11%4.09%4.42%3.81%4.41%2.82%2.82%2.03%2.24%3.19%2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


DBMF and RODM have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RODM has higher volatility (3.58%) compared to DBMF (2.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs RODM's -35.98%.

On 5-year performance, RODM leads with 9.73% vs 8.18% for DBMF. On fees, RODM is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, RODM has performed better with a 9.73% return vs 8.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RODM is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 2.78% for RODM.

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while RODM is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Hartford. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.29% for RODM.

RODM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 2.21), 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 RODM

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