QTR vs. DBMF
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 iMGP. QTR is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTR returned 17.27%/yr vs 9.09%/yr for DBMF. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
QTR vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QTR achieves a 9.22% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 11.19% return.
QTR
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- -3.59%
- 6M
- 8.37%
- YTD
- 9.22%
- 1Y
- 19.33%
- 3Y*
- 17.27%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 10.19%
DBMF
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 1.95%
- 6M
- 6.88%
- YTD
- 11.19%
- 1Y
- 28.45%
- 3Y*
- 9.09%
- 5Y*
- 8.34%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.17%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $63.53M | $54.84M | $51.08M | |
| $20.65K | $23.70K | $62.72K |
QTR vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 9.22% | 14.52% | 21.46% | 45.53% | -29.94% | 4.16% |
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 11.19% | 13.85% | 7.24% | -8.94% | 21.61% | 1.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between QTR and DBMF is 0.40, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2021 | 0.09 |
Over the past year, QTR and DBMF have become more correlated (0.40) than their long-term average of 0.09, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
QTR vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank
QTR
DBMF
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.44 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.41 | 4.54 | -3.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.26 | 15.42 | -11.16 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QTR | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.38% | -1.81% | -5.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.69% | -6.48% | -2.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.06% | 1.79% | +2.27% |
Volatility
QTR vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison
Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a higher volatility of 4.46% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.31%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QTR | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.46% | 2.31% | +2.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.49% | 9.81% | +3.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.64% | 12.68% | +3.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.30% | 12.44% | +5.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.30% | 12.36% | +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 17.10%, more than DBMF's 5.11% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 5.11% | 5.91% | 5.75% | 2.91% | 7.72% | 10.38% | 0.86% | 9.35% |
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 17.10% | 18.77% | 0.50% | 0.53% | 0.36% | 1.90% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QTR and DBMF have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QTR has higher volatility (4.46%) compared to DBMF (2.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs DBMF's -20.39%.
On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 17.27% vs 9.09% for DBMF. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 17.27% return vs 9.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.
QTR has the higher dividend yield at 17.10%, compared with 5.11% for DBMF.
QTR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iMGP. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QTR and 0.85% for DBMF.
DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.04), 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.
Find the right allocation for QTR 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