GDMA vs. DBMF
GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDMA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by Gadsden, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDMA returned 7.66%/yr vs 8.46%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
GDMA vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 11.18% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 12.42% return.
GDMA
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 1.83%
- YTD
- 11.18%
- 6M
- 14.08%
- 1Y
- 32.26%
- 3Y*
- 16.91%
- 5Y*
- 7.66%
- 10Y*
- —
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.35%
- YTD
- 12.42%
- 6M
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 31.40%
- 3Y*
- 10.81%
- 5Y*
- 8.46%
- 10Y*
- —
GDMA vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF | 11.18% | 25.29% | 7.44% | 1.72% | -2.08% | 3.95% | 21.08% | 8.15% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 12.42% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 21.61% | 11.49% | 1.80% | 10.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDMA and DBMF is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2019 | 0.44 |
The correlation between GDMA and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (5 years) to 0.53 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GDMA vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GDMA
DBMF
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
GDMA
DBMF
Financial Services
GDMA
DBMF
Industrials
GDMA
DBMF
Energy
GDMA
DBMF
Basic Materials
GDMA
DBMF
Consumer Cyclical
GDMA
DBMF
Communication Services
GDMA
DBMF
Healthcare
GDMA
DBMF
Consumer Defensive
GDMA
DBMF
Utilities
GDMA
DBMF
Real Estate
GDMA
DBMF
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
GDMA vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
GDMA
DBMF
GDMA vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) 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.
| GDMA | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.55 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.30 | 5.17 | -0.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.92 | 19.07 | -7.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GDMA | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | 2.59 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | 0.68 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.89 | 0.77 | +0.11 |
Drawdowns
GDMA vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and DBMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDMA | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.66% | -20.39% | +3.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -6.10% | -1.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.53% | -15.60% | +8.07% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.74% | -20.39% | +7.65% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.06% | 0.00% | -1.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -6.59% | +2.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 1.65% | +1.06% |
Volatility
GDMA vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 6.18% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.12%. This indicates that GDMA'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDMA | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.18% | 2.12% | +4.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.03% | 9.76% | +0.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.12% | 12.17% | +0.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.67% | 12.52% | -2.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.97% | 12.41% | -1.44% |
GDMA vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDMA vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison
GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, 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% |
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF | 2.51% | 2.79% | 2.32% | 4.14% | 1.18% | 2.10% | 0.62% | 3.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDMA and DBMF have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDMA has higher volatility (6.18%) compared to DBMF (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs DBMF's -20.39%.
On 5-year performance, DBMF leads with 8.46% vs 7.66% for GDMA. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 8.46% return vs 7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.09%, compared with 2.51% for GDMA.
GDMA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.47), 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.
Find the right allocation for GDMA and DBMF
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