DBMF vs. TFFI

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and TFFI (Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners, while TFFI is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by Chesapeake. Both are actively managed. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBMF charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for TFFI.

Performance

DBMF vs. TFFI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF (TFFI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

DBMF

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 1.06%
• 6M: 8.39%
• YTD: 11.44%
• 1Y: 27.14%
• 3Y*: 9.77%
• 5Y*: 8.44%
• 10Y*: —

TFFI

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 1.17%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DBMF vs. TFFI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	1.03%
TFFI Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF	0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between DBMF and TFFI is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2026	0.44

Return for Risk

DBMF vs. TFFI — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 87
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 89
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

TFFI

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. TFFI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) and Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF (TFFI). 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	TFFI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.84	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.47	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.17	—	—

Drawdowns

DBMF vs. TFFI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBMF drawdown since its inception was -20.39%, which is greater than TFFI's maximum drawdown of -4.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMF and TFFI.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBMF	TFFI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.39%	-4.23%	-16.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.60%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.87%	-1.62%	+0.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.52%	-1.65%	-4.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DBMF	TFFI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.82%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.14%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.64%	8.02%	+4.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.52%	8.02%	+4.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.39%	8.02%	+4.37%

DBMF vs. TFFI - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBMF has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than TFFI's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBMF vs. TFFI - Dividend Comparison

DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.10%, while TFFI has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.10%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
TFFI Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBMF and TFFI in my portfolio?

DBMF and TFFI have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DBMF or TFFI?

On fees, DBMF is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DBMF or TFFI?

DBMF is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TFFI.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.10%, compared with 0.00% for TFFI.

What is the main difference between DBMF and TFFI?

DBMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while TFFI is Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partners and Chesapeake. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DBMF and 1.01% for TFFI.