PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DCIBX vs. DFUSX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) and DFA U.S. Large Company Portfolio (DFUSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DCIBX achieves a 0.83% return, which is significantly lower than DFUSX's 11.70% return. Over the past 10 years, DCIBX has underperformed DFUSX with an annualized return of 1.35%, while DFUSX has yielded a comparatively higher 15.52% annualized return.


DCIBX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.22%
YTD
0.83%
6M
1.25%
1Y
4.95%
3Y*
3.04%
5Y*
1.07%
10Y*
1.35%

DFUSX

1D
0.14%
1M
5.79%
YTD
11.70%
6M
11.72%
1Y
28.90%
3Y*
22.69%
5Y*
14.21%
10Y*
15.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DCIBX
DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio
0.83%3.70%1.19%3.73%-3.75%-0.53%2.78%4.09%1.36%2.30%
DFUSX
DFA U.S. Large Company Portfolio
11.70%17.76%24.91%26.28%-18.14%28.53%18.41%32.08%-4.45%21.04%

Correlation

The correlation between DCIBX and DFUSX 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.13

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

0.10

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2012

-0.03

The correlation between DCIBX and DFUSX shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (all time) to 0.15 (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

DCIBX vs. DFUSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

DCIBX
DCIBX Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
DCIBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DCIBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
DCIBX Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
DCIBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
DCIBX Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank

DFUSX
DFUSX Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
DFUSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFUSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFUSX Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
DFUSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFUSX Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) and DFA U.S. Large Company Portfolio (DFUSX). 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.


DCIBXDFUSXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.01

2.60

+0.40

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.70

3.60

+1.09

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.86

1.47

+0.39

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.70

3.39

-0.69

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.45

15.85

-7.40

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DCIBX Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is comparable to the DFUSX Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DCIBX and DFUSX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DCIBXDFUSXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01

2.60

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.85

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

0.86

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.75

0.46

+0.29

Drawdowns

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DCIBX drawdown since its inception was -7.97%, smaller than the maximum DFUSX drawdown of -54.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCIBX and DFUSX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DCIBXDFUSXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.97%

-54.96%

+46.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.80%

-8.88%

+7.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.97%

-18.76%

+15.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.22%

-24.58%

+17.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-7.97%

-33.79%

+25.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.82%

0.00%

-0.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.29%

-10.60%

+9.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.57%

1.88%

-1.31%

Volatility

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) is 0.51%, while DFA U.S. Large Company Portfolio (DFUSX) has a volatility of 2.81%. This indicates that DCIBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFUSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DCIBXDFUSXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.51%

2.81%

-2.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.24%

8.99%

-7.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63%

11.55%

-9.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.19%

16.87%

-14.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.36%

18.07%

-15.71%

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

DCIBX has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than DFUSX's 0.08% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

DCIBX vs. DFUSX - Dividend Comparison

DCIBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, more than DFUSX's 0.95% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DCIBX
DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio
2.59%2.44%2.06%1.69%1.15%1.05%1.34%1.46%1.44%1.32%1.44%1.61%
DFUSX
DFA U.S. Large Company Portfolio
0.95%1.04%1.24%4.17%6.24%6.57%3.82%2.74%2.64%1.56%1.95%2.87%

Frequently Asked Questions


DCIBX and DFUSX 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.

DFUSX has higher volatility (2.81%) compared to DCIBX (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCIBX dropped -7.97% vs DFUSX's -54.96%.

DCIBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.60), 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 DCIBX and DFUSX

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