FLSP vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLSP (Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLSP is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLSP returned 7.70%/yr vs 8.46%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLSP charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

FLSP vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF (FLSP) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLSP achieves a 1.26% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 12.42% return.

FLSP

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 1.15%
• YTD: 1.26%
• 6M: 3.45%
• 1Y: 14.67%
• 3Y*: 10.00%
• 5Y*: 7.70%
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 2.35%
• YTD: 12.42%
• 6M: 14.20%
• 1Y: 31.40%
• 3Y*: 10.81%
• 5Y*: 8.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLSP vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FLSP Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF	1.26%	15.56%	11.75%	3.14%	0.44%	11.44%	-15.19%	0.90%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	12.42%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	11.49%	1.80%	-0.46%

Correlation

The correlation between FLSP and DBMF is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 24, 2019	0.13

FLSP vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLSP	DBMF
Technology	21.1%	29.8%
Financial Services	18.7%	12.5%
Industrials	14.8%	8.4%
Healthcare	9.7%	12.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	11.0%
Communication Services	6.5%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	6.1%
Basic Materials	5.8%	2.2%
Energy	4.7%	3.9%
Utilities	3.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.2%	2.5%

Return for Risk

FLSP vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLSP

FLSP Risk / Return Rank: 53
FLSP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
FLSP Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FLSP Omega Ratio Rank: 42
FLSP Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
FLSP Martin Ratio Rank: 59

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 83
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

FLSP vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF (FLSP) 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.

	FLSP	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	2.59	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	3.39	-1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.55	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.66	5.17	-1.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.59	19.07	-8.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLSP vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLSP Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLSP 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

	FLSP	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	2.59	-1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	0.68	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.77	-0.47

Drawdowns

FLSP vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLSP drawdown since its inception was -22.75%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLSP and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLSP	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.75%	-20.39%	-2.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.03%	-6.10%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.69%	-15.60%	+8.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.52%	-20.39%	+10.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.94%	0.00%	-1.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.30%	-6.59%	+0.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.39%	1.65%	-0.26%

Volatility

FLSP vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF (FLSP) is 1.98%, while iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 2.12%. This indicates that FLSP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLSP	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.98%	2.12%	-0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.86%	9.76%	-2.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.27%	12.17%	-2.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.37%	12.52%	+0.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.53%	12.41%	+1.12%

FLSP vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLSP has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLSP vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

FLSP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, less than DBMF's 5.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.09%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
FLSP Franklin Liberty Systematic Style Premia ETF	2.62%	2.65%	1.18%	1.19%	2.18%	1.19%	8.08%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLSP and DBMF in my portfolio?

FLSP and DBMF have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLSP or DBMF?

DBMF has higher volatility (2.12%) compared to FLSP (1.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLSP dropped -22.75% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, FLSP or DBMF?

On 5-year performance, DBMF leads with 8.46% vs 7.70% for FLSP. On fees, FLSP is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FLSP has been the lower-risk option at 1.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLSP or DBMF?

Over the 5-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 8.46% return vs 7.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLSP or DBMF?

FLSP is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.09%, compared with 2.62% for FLSP.

What is the main difference between FLSP and DBMF?

FLSP is categorized as Long-Short, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for FLSP and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.59), 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.