DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE
DBMFE.PA (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Fund R EUR UCITS ETF Acc) and PPFB.DE (iShares Physical Gold ETC) are both exchange-traded funds - DBMFE.PA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by iM Global Partner, while PPFB.DE is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold. DBMFE.PA is actively managed, while PPFB.DE is passively managed. Over the past year, DBMFE.PA returned 28.35% vs 30.20% for PPFB.DE. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBMFE.PA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for PPFB.DE.
Performance
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DBMFE.PA achieves a 12.65% return, which is significantly higher than PPFB.DE's 2.74% return.
DBMFE.PA
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 2.62%
- YTD
- 12.65%
- 6M
- 14.28%
- 1Y
- 28.35%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PPFB.DE
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- -1.58%
- YTD
- 2.74%
- 6M
- 6.39%
- 1Y
- 30.20%
- 3Y*
- 28.05%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DBMFE.PA iMGP DBi Managed Futures Fund R EUR UCITS ETF Acc | 12.65% | 8.56% |
PPFB.DE iShares Physical Gold ETC | 2.74% | 29.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between DBMFE.PA and PPFB.DE is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025 | 0.10 |
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
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE — Risk / Return Rank
DBMFE.PA
PPFB.DE
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Fund R EUR UCITS ETF Acc (DBMFE.PA) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE). 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.
| DBMFE.PA | PPFB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.26 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.99 | 1.81 | +2.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.14 | 4.60 | +3.54 |
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
| DBMFE.PA | PPFB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.55 | 1.30 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.05 | 1.26 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DBMFE.PA drawdown since its inception was -7.01%, smaller than the maximum PPFB.DE drawdown of -16.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBMFE.PA and PPFB.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DBMFE.PA | PPFB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.01% | -16.60% | +9.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.01% | -16.60% | +9.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.43% | -15.00% | +13.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.01% | -4.40% | +1.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.46% | 6.55% | -3.09% |
Volatility
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iMGP DBi Managed Futures Fund R EUR UCITS ETF Acc (DBMFE.PA) is 3.81%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE) has a volatility of 5.11%. This indicates that DBMFE.PA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PPFB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DBMFE.PA | PPFB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.81% | 5.11% | -1.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.36% | 20.18% | -8.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.01% | 23.12% | -5.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 16.13% | +1.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 16.13% | +1.57% |
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
DBMFE.PA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PPFB.DE's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
DBMFE.PA vs. PPFB.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither DBMFE.PA nor PPFB.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
DBMFE.PA and PPFB.DE have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PPFB.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PPFB.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DBMFE.PA.
DBMFE.PA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while PPFB.DE is Precious Metals. They also come from different issuers: iM Global Partner and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DBMFE.PA and 0.12% for PPFB.DE.
Find the right allocation for DBMFE.PA and PPFB.DE
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