PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NU vs. DBMF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NU vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NU achieves a -27.18% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 10.27% return.


NU

1D
0.83%
1M
-4.91%
YTD
-27.18%
6M
-27.87%
1Y
1.58%
3Y*
17.37%
5Y*
10Y*

DBMF

1D
0.26%
1M
-0.96%
YTD
10.27%
6M
11.24%
1Y
27.33%
3Y*
9.64%
5Y*
8.01%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NU vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
NU
Nu Holdings Ltd.
-27.18%61.58%24.37%104.67%-56.61%-16.62%
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
10.27%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%1.14%

Correlation

The correlation between NU and DBMF is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.14

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2021

0.03

The correlation between NU and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.03 (all time) to 0.15 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

NU vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

NU
NU Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
NU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NU Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
NU Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
NU Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
NU Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

NU vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) 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.


NUDBMFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.60

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.47

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.04

4.50

-4.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.10

16.30

-16.20

NU vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NU Sharpe Ratio is 0.04, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NU 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NU vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NU drawdown since its inception was -72.07%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NU and DBMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NUDBMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.07%

-20.39%

-51.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.17%

-6.10%

-32.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.58%

-15.60%

-23.98%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-35.02%

-1.91%

-33.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.77%

-6.56%

-23.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

15.36%

1.68%

+13.68%

Volatility

NU vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) has a higher volatility of 14.80% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.71%. This indicates that NU'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


NUDBMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.80%

2.71%

+12.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.91%

10.00%

+18.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.77%

12.35%

+26.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

58.48%

12.55%

+45.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

58.48%

12.41%

+46.07%

Dividends

NU vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

NU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.19%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.19%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%
NU
Nu Holdings Ltd.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NU and DBMF have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NU has higher volatility (14.80%) compared to DBMF (2.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NU dropped -72.07% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 0.04), 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 NU 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