PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DFSB vs. FTGC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DFSB vs. FTGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Global Sustainability Fixed Income ETF (DFSB) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFSB achieves a 1.82% return, which is significantly lower than FTGC's 16.89% return.


DFSB

1D
0.41%
1M
1.46%
YTD
1.82%
6M
1.56%
1Y
4.25%
3Y*
5.10%
5Y*
10Y*

FTGC

1D
-1.65%
1M
-8.90%
YTD
16.89%
6M
15.85%
1Y
28.35%
3Y*
13.63%
5Y*
11.70%
10Y*
6.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFSB vs. FTGC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
DFSB
Dimensional Global Sustainability Fixed Income ETF
1.82%5.22%2.45%9.37%-0.62%
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
16.89%14.61%9.96%-5.36%-1.15%

Correlation

The correlation between DFSB and FTGC is -0.27, 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

-0.27

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2022

-0.09

The correlation between DFSB and FTGC shifts across timeframes, from -0.27 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), 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

DFSB vs. FTGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFSB
DFSB Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
DFSB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFSB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFSB Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
DFSB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFSB Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

FTGC
FTGC Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
FTGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTGC Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
FTGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTGC Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
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.

DFSB vs. FTGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Global Sustainability Fixed Income ETF (DFSB) and First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC). 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.


DFSBFTGCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.33

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.40

2.31

-0.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.28

9.40

-5.12

DFSB vs. FTGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFSB Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the FTGC Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFSB and FTGC, 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

DFSB vs. FTGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFSB drawdown since its inception was -5.16%, smaller than the maximum FTGC drawdown of -59.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFSB and FTGC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DFSBFTGCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.16%

-59.47%

+54.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.04%

-12.34%

+9.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.37%

-12.34%

+7.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.16%

-12.34%

+12.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.25%

-27.33%

+26.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

3.02%

-2.03%

Volatility

DFSB vs. FTGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional Global Sustainability Fixed Income ETF (DFSB) is 1.22%, while First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) has a volatility of 3.33%. This indicates that DFSB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DFSBFTGCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.22%

3.33%

-2.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.23%

13.32%

-10.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.92%

15.64%

-11.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.45%

15.89%

-10.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.45%

14.72%

-9.27%

DFSB vs. FTGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFSB has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGC's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

DFSB vs. FTGC - Dividend Comparison

DFSB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.31%, less than FTGC's 16.40% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
DFSB
Dimensional Global Sustainability Fixed Income ETF
4.31%3.46%4.35%5.27%0.41%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
16.40%17.74%3.05%3.34%10.35%7.21%0.00%0.81%0.80%1.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


DFSB and FTGC have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FTGC has higher volatility (3.33%) compared to DFSB (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFSB dropped -5.16% vs FTGC's -59.47%.

On 3-year performance, FTGC leads with 13.63% vs 5.10% for DFSB. On fees, DFSB is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, DFSB has been the lower-risk option at 1.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 13.63% return vs 5.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFSB is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FTGC.

FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 16.40%, compared with 4.31% for DFSB.

DFSB is categorized as Global Bonds, while FTGC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for DFSB and 0.95% for FTGC.

FTGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.09), 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 DFSB and FTGC

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