PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DFNM vs. FFUT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DFNM vs. FFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF (DFNM) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFNM achieves a 1.14% return, which is significantly lower than FFUT's 8.83% return.


DFNM

1D
-0.29%
1M
0.63%
YTD
1.14%
6M
1.27%
1Y
4.87%
3Y*
3.10%
5Y*
10Y*

FFUT

1D
-0.36%
1M
-2.69%
YTD
8.83%
6M
9.28%
1Y
18.72%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFNM vs. FFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between DFNM and FFUT is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025

-0.21

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

DFNM vs. FFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFNM
DFNM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
DFNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFNM Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
DFNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFNM Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

FFUT
FFUT Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
FFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
FFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

DFNM vs. FFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF (DFNM) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). 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.


DFNMFFUTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.60

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.63

1.32

+0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.66

4.35

-1.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.53

14.55

-5.02

DFNM vs. FFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFNM Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is higher than the FFUT Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFNM and FFUT, 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...

Drawdowns

DFNM vs. FFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFNM drawdown since its inception was -6.99%, which is greater than FFUT's maximum drawdown of -4.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFNM and FFUT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DFNMFFUTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.99%

-4.33%

-2.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.84%

-4.33%

+2.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.50%

-4.33%

+3.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.94%

-0.96%

-0.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.51%

1.29%

-0.78%

Volatility

DFNM vs. FFUT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF (DFNM) is 0.51%, while Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT) has a volatility of 2.93%. This indicates that DFNM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DFNMFFUTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.51%

2.93%

-2.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.33%

8.97%

-7.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.74%

11.22%

-9.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.53%

11.02%

-8.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.53%

11.02%

-8.49%

DFNM vs. FFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFNM has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than FFUT's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

DFNM vs. FFUT - Dividend Comparison

DFNM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, more than FFUT's 1.92% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
DFNM
Dimensional National Municipal Bond ETF
2.90%2.94%2.74%2.39%1.16%0.05%
FFUT
Fidelity Managed Futures ETF
1.92%2.09%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


DFNM and FFUT have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFUT has higher volatility (2.93%) compared to DFNM (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFNM dropped -6.99% vs FFUT's -4.33%.

On 1-year performance, FFUT leads with 18.72% vs 4.87% for DFNM. On fees, DFNM is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, DFNM has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FFUT has performed better with a 18.72% return vs 4.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFNM is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FFUT.

DFNM has the higher dividend yield at 2.90%, compared with 1.92% for FFUT.

DFNM is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FFUT is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for DFNM and 0.80% for FFUT.

DFNM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.68), 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 DFNM and FFUT

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