PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMRFX vs. GBMFX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) and GMO Benchmark-Free Allocation Fund (GBMFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMRFX achieves a 5.13% return, which is significantly lower than GBMFX's 12.95% return. Over the past 10 years, IMRFX has underperformed GBMFX with an annualized return of 5.62%, while GBMFX has yielded a comparatively higher 6.78% annualized return.


IMRFX

1D
1.38%
1M
-0.43%
6M
2.80%
YTD
5.13%
1Y
13.50%
3Y*
10.31%
5Y*
2.90%
10Y*
5.62%
ALL TIME*
7.68%

GBMFX

1D
0.89%
1M
3.31%
6M
8.34%
YTD
12.95%
1Y
26.03%
3Y*
14.87%
5Y*
9.81%
10Y*
6.78%
ALL TIME*
7.69%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$0.00$0.00$0.00
$0.00$0.00$0.00

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMRFX
Columbia Global Opportunities Fund
5.13%15.88%7.46%11.29%-21.02%6.25%12.55%15.62%-7.03%18.17%
GBMFX
GMO Benchmark-Free Allocation Fund
12.95%22.89%4.33%13.46%-2.24%2.97%-2.50%11.62%-5.36%13.05%

Correlation

The correlation between IMRFX and GBMFX is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.75

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.69

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2003

0.79

The correlation between IMRFX and GBMFX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

IMRFX vs. GBMFX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IMRFX
IMRFX Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
IMRFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMRFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMRFX Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
IMRFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMRFX Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

GBMFX
GBMFX Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
GBMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GBMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
GBMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
GBMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
GBMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) and GMO Benchmark-Free Allocation Fund (GBMFX). 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.


IMRFXGBMFXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.72

-0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.58

4.49

-2.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.45

16.23

-9.78

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMRFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is lower than the GBMFX Sharpe Ratio of 3.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMRFX and GBMFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMRFX drawdown since its inception was -45.67%, which is greater than GBMFX's maximum drawdown of -23.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMRFX and GBMFX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMRFXGBMFXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.67%

-23.40%

-22.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.07%

-5.78%

-2.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.19%

-7.16%

-3.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.77%

-13.20%

-15.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.77%

-23.40%

-5.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.90%

0.00%

-1.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.30%

-3.26%

-4.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

1.60%

+0.38%

Volatility

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) has a higher volatility of 2.81% compared to GMO Benchmark-Free Allocation Fund (GBMFX) at 1.83%. This indicates that IMRFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBMFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMRFXGBMFXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.81%

1.83%

+0.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.61%

5.93%

+2.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.13%

7.24%

+2.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.03%

7.34%

+3.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.42%

7.97%

+2.45%

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMRFX has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than GBMFX's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

IMRFX vs. GBMFX - Dividend Comparison

IMRFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 17.00%, more than GBMFX's 3.75% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GBMFX
GMO Benchmark-Free Allocation Fund
3.75%4.16%5.14%5.64%3.20%2.46%3.73%3.35%3.67%2.39%1.60%2.10%
IMRFX
Columbia Global Opportunities Fund
17.00%17.87%0.47%0.00%6.62%7.92%4.40%1.75%0.35%0.00%2.77%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMRFX and GBMFX have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IMRFX has higher volatility (2.81%) compared to GBMFX (1.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMRFX dropped -45.67% vs GBMFX's -23.40%.

GBMFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.60 vs 1.26), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IMRFX and GBMFX

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