QQQH vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQQH (NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQH is a Nasdaq-100 fund managed by Neos, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Over the past 5 years, QQQH returned 9.42%/yr vs 8.46%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQQH charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

QQQH vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) 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, QQQH achieves a 7.91% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 12.42% return.

QQQH

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 4.93%
• YTD: 7.91%
• 6M: 7.82%
• 1Y: 20.09%
• 3Y*: 20.71%
• 5Y*: 9.42%
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 2.35%
• YTD: 12.42%
• 6M: 14.20%
• 1Y: 31.40%
• 3Y*: 10.81%
• 5Y*: 8.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

QQQH vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	7.91%	14.17%	25.98%	30.96%	-28.35%	9.76%	18.62%	0.31%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	12.42%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	11.49%	1.80%	-0.53%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQH and DBMF is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.25
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2019	0.16

The correlation between QQQH and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (5 years) to 0.36 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QQQH vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQH	DBMF
Technology	53.5%	29.8%
Communication Services	16.1%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	12.1%	11.0%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	6.1%
Healthcare	4.1%	12.7%
Industrials	3.1%	8.4%
Utilities	1.3%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.2%	2.2%
Energy	0.6%	3.9%
Financial Services	0.2%	12.5%
Real Estate	0.1%	2.5%

Return for Risk

QQQH vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQH

QQQH Risk / Return Rank: 62
QQQH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QQQH Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
QQQH Omega Ratio Rank: 63
QQQH Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
QQQH Martin Ratio Rank: 67

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 83
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

QQQH vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) 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.

	QQQH	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.59	-0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.39	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.55	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	5.17	-2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.60	19.07	-6.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQQH vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQH Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQH 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QQQH	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.09	2.59	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72	0.68	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.77	+0.01

Drawdowns

QQQH vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQH drawdown since its inception was -31.24%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQH and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQH	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.24%	-20.39%	-10.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.96%	-6.10%	-0.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.18%	-15.60%	+0.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.24%	-20.39%	-10.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	0.00%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.27%	-6.59%	-1.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.60%	1.65%	-0.05%

Volatility

QQQH vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF (QQQH) is 1.73%, while iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 2.12%. This indicates that QQQH 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

	QQQH	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.73%	2.12%	-0.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.34%	9.76%	-2.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.67%	12.17%	-2.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.20%	12.52%	+0.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.37%	12.41%	+0.96%

QQQH vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQH has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQH vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

QQQH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.74%, more than DBMF's 5.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.09%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
QQQH NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	8.74%	8.86%	7.53%	7.18%	9.05%	7.77%	7.48%	0.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQH and DBMF in my portfolio?

QQQH and DBMF have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQH or DBMF?

DBMF has higher volatility (2.12%) compared to QQQH (1.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQH dropped -31.24% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, QQQH or DBMF?

On 5-year performance, QQQH leads with 9.42% vs 8.46% for DBMF. On fees, QQQH is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, QQQH has been the lower-risk option at 1.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQH or DBMF?

Over the 5-year period, QQQH has performed better with a 9.42% return vs 8.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQH or DBMF?

QQQH is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

QQQH has the higher dividend yield at 8.74%, compared with 5.09% for DBMF.

What is the main difference between QQQH and DBMF?

QQQH is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Neos and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for QQQH and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.09), 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.