QTR vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. QTR is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTR returned 20.74%/yr vs 8.78%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

QTR vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) 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, QTR achieves a 14.00% return, which is significantly higher than DBMF's 9.37% return.

QTR

• 1D: -2.27%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 14.00%
• 6M: 12.63%
• 1Y: 28.74%
• 3Y*: 20.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBMF

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -1.67%
• YTD: 9.37%
• 6M: 8.47%
• 1Y: 26.10%
• 3Y*: 8.78%
• 5Y*: 7.97%
• 10Y*: —

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

QTR vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	14.00%	14.52%	21.46%	45.53%	-29.94%	4.16%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	9.37%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	1.35%

Correlation

The correlation between QTR and DBMF is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021	0.08

Over the past year, QTR and DBMF have become more correlated (0.39) than their long-term average of 0.08, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

QTR vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTR

QTR Risk / Return Rank: 53
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 55
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 49

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 74
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

QTR vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) 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.

	QTR	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	2.10	-0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	2.77	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.44	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.35	4.30	-1.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.86	15.28	-7.42

QTR vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTR 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.

Drawdowns

QTR vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTR drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTR and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTR	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-20.39%	-11.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.29%	-6.10%	-6.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.99%	-15.60%	-3.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.33%	-2.71%	-0.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.77%	-6.55%	-2.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	1.71%	+1.95%

Volatility

QTR vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a higher volatility of 8.36% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 3.11%. This indicates that QTR'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.

Volatility by Period

	QTR	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.36%	3.11%	+5.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.86%	10.14%	+2.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.96%	12.47%	+3.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.35%	12.53%	+5.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.35%	12.41%	+5.94%

QTR vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTR vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

QTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.47%, more than DBMF's 5.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.23%	5.91%	5.75%	2.91%	7.72%	10.38%	0.86%	9.35%
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	16.47%	18.77%	0.50%	0.53%	0.36%	1.90%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTR and DBMF in my portfolio?

QTR and DBMF have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QTR or DBMF?

QTR has higher volatility (8.36%) compared to DBMF (3.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, QTR or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 20.74% vs 8.78% for DBMF. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 3.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTR or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 20.74% return vs 8.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTR or DBMF?

QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

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

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 16.47%, compared with 5.23% for DBMF.

What is the main difference between QTR and DBMF?

QTR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QTR and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.81), 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.