HARD vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

HARD (Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HARD is a Commodities fund actively managed by Simplify, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HARD returned 10.40%/yr vs 9.24%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HARD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

HARD vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) 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, HARD achieves a 4.88% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 10.77% return.

HARD

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: -11.24%
• YTD: 4.88%
• 6M: 2.63%
• 1Y: 8.74%
• 3Y*: 10.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 10.77%
• 6M: 10.08%
• 1Y: 27.61%
• 3Y*: 9.24%
• 5Y*: 8.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

HARD vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HARD Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	4.88%	12.19%	20.48%	-5.04%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	10.77%	13.85%	7.24%	0.60%

Correlation

The correlation between HARD and DBMF is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2023	0.28

Over the past year, HARD and DBMF have become more correlated (0.48) than their long-term average of 0.28, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

HARD vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

HARD

HARD Risk / Return Rank: 13
HARD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
HARD Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
HARD Omega Ratio Rank: 13
HARD Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
HARD Martin Ratio Rank: 15

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 78
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 82
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

HARD vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) 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.

	HARD	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.33	2.24	-1.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.60	2.94	-2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.47	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.48	4.55	-4.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.41	16.25	-14.83

HARD vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HARD Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HARD 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.

Drawdowns

HARD vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HARD drawdown since its inception was -18.12%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HARD and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	HARD	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.12%	-20.39%	+2.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.12%	-6.10%	-12.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.12%	-15.60%	-2.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.12%	-1.46%	-16.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.61%	-6.55%	+0.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.21%	1.70%	+4.51%

Volatility

HARD vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF (HARD) has a higher volatility of 5.10% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.85%. This indicates that HARD'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.

Volatility by Period

	HARD	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.10%	2.85%	+2.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.87%	10.05%	+11.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.37%	12.42%	+13.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.05%	12.52%	+6.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.05%	12.40%	+6.65%

HARD vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

HARD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

HARD vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

HARD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than DBMF's 5.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.17%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
HARD Simplify Commodities Strategy No K-1 ETF	2.86%	2.36%	3.51%	1.95%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HARD and DBMF in my portfolio?

HARD and DBMF have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HARD or DBMF?

HARD has higher volatility (5.10%) compared to DBMF (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HARD dropped -18.12% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, HARD or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, HARD leads with 10.40% vs 9.24% for DBMF. On fees, HARD is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HARD or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, HARD has performed better with a 10.40% return vs 9.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HARD or DBMF?

HARD is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.17%, compared with 2.86% for HARD.

What is the main difference between HARD and DBMF?

HARD is categorized as Commodities, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for HARD and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 0.33), 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.