HAP vs. DBMF
HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HAP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. HAP is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, HAP returned 11.22%/yr vs 8.01%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HAP charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
HAP vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HAP achieves a 18.44% return, which is significantly higher than DBMF's 10.27% return.
HAP
- 1D
- 1.21%
- 1M
- -4.04%
- YTD
- 18.44%
- 6M
- 19.25%
- 1Y
- 38.39%
- 3Y*
- 17.05%
- 5Y*
- 11.22%
- 10Y*
- 11.95%
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- -1.31%
- YTD
- 10.27%
- 6M
- 11.24%
- 1Y
- 26.94%
- 3Y*
- 9.64%
- 5Y*
- 8.01%
- 10Y*
- —
HAP vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 18.44% | 34.91% | -4.08% | 2.46% | 7.84% | 25.04% | 6.30% | 9.46% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 10.27% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 21.61% | 11.49% | 1.80% | 10.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between HAP and DBMF is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2019 | 0.22 |
Over the past year, HAP and DBMF have become more correlated (0.49) than their long-term average of 0.22, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
HAP vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
HAP
DBMF
HAP vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) 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.
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.
| HAP | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.47 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.74 | 4.50 | +0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.71 | 16.30 | +1.41 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
HAP vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HAP drawdown since its inception was -50.99%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAP and DBMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HAP | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.99% | -20.39% | -30.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.31% | -6.10% | -2.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.92% | -15.60% | -1.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | -20.39% | -5.27% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.42% | -1.91% | -2.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.07% | -6.56% | -5.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.22% | 1.68% | +0.54% |
Volatility
HAP vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) has a higher volatility of 5.20% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.71%. This indicates that HAP'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
| HAP | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.20% | 2.71% | +2.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.86% | 10.00% | +2.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.50% | 12.35% | +3.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.32% | 12.55% | +5.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.75% | 12.41% | +7.34% |
HAP vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
HAP has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
HAP vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison
HAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, less than DBMF's 5.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 5.19% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 1.91% | 2.27% | 2.65% | 3.27% | 3.28% | 2.16% | 2.45% | 2.80% | 2.85% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 3.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HAP and DBMF have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
HAP has higher volatility (5.20%) compared to DBMF (2.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAP dropped -50.99% vs DBMF's -20.39%.
On 5-year performance, HAP leads with 11.22% vs 8.01% for DBMF. On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, HAP has performed better with a 11.22% return vs 8.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.19%, compared with 1.91% for HAP.
HAP is categorized as Energy Equities, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for HAP and 0.85% for DBMF.
HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.22), 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 HAP 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