DBMF vs. RSBT

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and RSBT (Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while RSBT is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Return Stacked. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DBMF returned 9.37%/yr vs 3.17%/yr for RSBT. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for RSBT.

Performance

DBMF vs. RSBT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBMF achieves a 10.76% return, which is significantly higher than RSBT's 5.80% return.

DBMF

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 0.44%
• 6M: 9.05%
• YTD: 10.76%
• 1Y: 26.36%
• 3Y*: 9.37%
• 5Y*: 8.37%
• 10Y*: —

RSBT

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -0.58%
• 6M: 1.77%
• YTD: 5.80%
• 1Y: 19.08%
• 3Y*: 3.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DBMF vs. RSBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	10.76%	13.85%	7.24%	-6.76%
RSBT Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF	5.80%	10.31%	-2.90%	-11.85%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and RSBT is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2023	0.51

The correlation between DBMF and RSBT shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (all time) to 0.68 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

DBMF vs. RSBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 85
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 88
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

RSBT

RSBT Risk / Return Rank: 51
RSBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
RSBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
RSBT Omega Ratio Rank: 46
RSBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
RSBT Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. RSBT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT). 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	RSBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	1.27	+0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	1.68	+1.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.24	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.36	2.93	+1.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.82	6.92	+7.90

DBMF vs. RSBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is higher than the RSBT Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBMF and RSBT, 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. RSBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, smaller than the maximum RSBT drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and RSBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBMF	RSBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.39%	-23.60%	+3.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.10%	-6.33%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.60%	-18.98%	+3.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.48%	-4.39%	+2.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.52%	-12.37%	+5.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	2.67%	-0.88%

Volatility

DBMF vs. RSBT - Volatility Comparison

iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT) have volatilities of 2.75% and 2.83%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DBMF	RSBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.75%	2.83%	-0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.13%	10.33%	-0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.61%	14.58%	-1.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.52%	13.79%	-1.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.39%	13.79%	-1.40%

DBMF vs. RSBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than RSBT's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBMF vs. RSBT - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%, more than RSBT's 3.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.13%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
RSBT Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF	3.03%	3.20%	0.00%	2.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBMF and RSBT in my portfolio?

DBMF and RSBT have a correlation of 0.68, 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 RSBT?

RSBT has higher volatility (2.83%) compared to DBMF (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBMF dropped -20.39% vs RSBT's -23.60%.

Which ETF is better, DBMF or RSBT?

On 3-year performance, DBMF leads with 9.37% vs 3.17% for RSBT. On fees, DBMF is cheaper at 0.85% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DBMF or RSBT?

Over the 3-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 9.37% return vs 3.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DBMF or RSBT?

DBMF is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for RSBT.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.13%, compared with 3.03% for RSBT.

What is the main difference between DBMF and RSBT?

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while RSBT is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 0.97% for RSBT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.27), 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.