MFUL vs. DBMF

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) and iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF).

MFUL and DBMF are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. MFUL is an actively managed fund by Mohr Funds. It was launched on Nov 2, 2021. DBMF is an actively managed fund by Litman Gregory Capital Partners LLC. It was launched on May 8, 2019.

Performance

MFUL vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) and iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

MFUL vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	-0.53%	4.51%	5.36%	2.24%	-12.46%	-1.61%
DBMF iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	7.87%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	-1.03%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUL achieves a -0.53% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 7.87% return.

MFUL

• 1D: 0.74%
• 1M: -2.62%
• YTD: -0.53%
• 6M: -0.41%
• 1Y: 3.24%
• 3Y*: 3.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -3.82%
• YTD: 7.87%
• 6M: 15.44%
• 1Y: 26.29%
• 3Y*: 9.90%
• 5Y*: 8.63%
• 10Y*: —

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

MFUL vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUL has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

MFUL

Mindful Conservative ETF

DBMF

iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF

Return for Risk

MFUL vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUL

MFUL Risk / Return Rank: 35
MFUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
MFUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
MFUL Omega Ratio Rank: 34
MFUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
MFUL Martin Ratio Rank: 36

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 95
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 95
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

MFUL vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) and iM 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.

	MFUL	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.69	2.19	-1.50
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.94	2.98	-2.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.46	-0.32
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.94	4.25	-3.31
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.33	18.51	-15.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MFUL vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFUL Sharpe Ratio is 0.69, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFUL and DBMF, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MFUL	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69	2.19	-1.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.20	0.74	-0.93

Correlation

The correlation between MFUL and DBMF is 0.07, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

MFUL vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

MFUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, less than DBMF's 5.30% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.13%	3.31%	2.59%	5.00%	0.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DBMF iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.30%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%

Drawdowns

MFUL vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUL drawdown since its inception was -16.41%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUL and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUL	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.41%	-20.39%	+3.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.77%	-6.10%	+2.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.13%	-3.82%	-0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.80%	-6.70%	-3.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.06%	1.40%	-0.34%

Volatility

MFUL vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) is 1.89%, while iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 5.24%. This indicates that MFUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MFUL	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.89%	5.24%	-3.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.10%	11.10%	-8.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.75%	12.09%	-7.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.22%	12.66%	-8.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.22%	12.48%	-8.26%