DFIV vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFIV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFIV returned 23.03%/yr vs 10.02%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DFIV charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

DFIV vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with DFIV having a 10.17% return and DBMF slightly higher at 10.45%.

DFIV

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: -0.58%
• YTD: 10.17%
• 6M: 14.07%
• 1Y: 32.57%
• 3Y*: 23.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: 10.45%
• 6M: 12.63%
• 1Y: 29.05%
• 3Y*: 10.02%
• 5Y*: 7.92%
• 10Y*: —

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

DFIV vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	10.17%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.08%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	10.45%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	1.37%

Correlation

The correlation between DFIV and DBMF is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2021	0.09

Over the past year, DFIV and DBMF have become more correlated (0.41) than their long-term average of 0.09, meaning their price movements have been converging.

DFIV vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFIV	DBMF
Financial Services	32.4%	12.5%
Energy	16.4%	3.9%
Basic Materials	10.9%	2.2%
Industrials	9.6%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	11.0%
Healthcare	4.9%	12.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	6.1%
Communication Services	4.2%	8.6%
Technology	2.8%	29.8%
Utilities	2.5%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.8%	2.5%

Return for Risk

DFIV vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 78
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 79
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 76

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 84
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 88
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

DFIV vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). 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.

	DFIV	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	2.36	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.08	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.50	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	4.78	-1.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.05	17.53	-4.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFIV vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFIV Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFIV and DBMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DFIV	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.36	2.36	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.91	0.75	+0.16

Drawdowns

DFIV vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFIV drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFIV and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFIV	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.42%	-20.39%	-5.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.66%	-6.10%	-3.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.72%	-15.60%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.23%	-1.75%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.47%	-6.58%	+2.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.50%	1.66%	+0.84%

Volatility

DFIV vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) has a higher volatility of 3.83% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.94%. This indicates that DFIV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFIV	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.83%	2.94%	+0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.26%	10.01%	+1.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.91%	12.38%	+1.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.65%	12.56%	+4.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.65%	12.43%	+4.22%

DFIV vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFIV has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFIV vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

DFIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, less than DBMF's 5.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.18%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.59%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFIV and DBMF in my portfolio?

DFIV and DBMF have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFIV or DBMF?

DFIV has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to DBMF (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFIV dropped -25.42% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, DFIV or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 23.03% vs 10.02% for DBMF. On fees, DFIV is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFIV or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 23.03% return vs 10.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFIV or DBMF?

DFIV is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.18%, compared with 2.59% for DFIV.

What is the main difference between DFIV and DBMF?

DFIV is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for DFIV and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.36), 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.