IBDW vs. SDMF
IBDW (iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF) and SDMF (Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBDW is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg December 2031 Maturity Corporate Index, while SDMF is a Systematic Trend fund tracking the DBi CTA Managed Futures Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. IBDW charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SDMF.
Performance
IBDW vs. SDMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IBDW
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 0.11%
- YTD
- 0.14%
- 6M
- 0.26%
- 1Y
- 5.40%
- 3Y*
- 5.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SDMF
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 2.33%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBDW vs. SDMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IBDW iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF | -0.85% |
SDMF Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF | 3.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBDW and SDMF is -0.11, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2026 | -0.11 |
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
IBDW vs. SDMF — Risk / Return Rank
IBDW
SDMF
IBDW vs. SDMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF (IBDW) and Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF (SDMF). 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.
| IBDW | SDMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.54 | — | — |
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
| IBDW | SDMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.54 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.06 | 0.93 | -0.87 |
Drawdowns
IBDW vs. SDMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBDW drawdown since its inception was -23.87%, which is greater than SDMF's maximum drawdown of -6.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBDW and SDMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBDW | SDMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.87% | -6.23% | -17.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.42% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.61% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.13% | 0.00% | -1.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.47% | -2.26% | -7.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.72% | — | — |
Volatility
IBDW vs. SDMF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBDW | SDMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.02% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.42% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.52% | 13.27% | -9.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.26% | 13.27% | -6.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.26% | 13.27% | -6.01% |
IBDW vs. SDMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBDW has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than SDMF's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBDW vs. SDMF - Dividend Comparison
IBDW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.79%, while SDMF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBDW iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF | 4.79% | 4.78% | 5.00% | 4.50% | 3.70% | 1.10% |
SDMF Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBDW and SDMF have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBDW is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBDW is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for SDMF.
IBDW has the higher dividend yield at 4.79%, compared with 0.00% for SDMF.
IBDW is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while SDMF is Systematic Trend. IBDW tracks Bloomberg December 2031 Maturity Corporate Index, while SDMF tracks DBi CTA Managed Futures Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBDW and 0.35% for SDMF.
Find the right allocation for IBDW and SDMF
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