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

Performance

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RGBM.TO is traded in CAD, while DBMF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the DBMF values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RGBM.TO achieves a 17.43% return, which is significantly higher than DBMF's 13.66% return.


RGBM.TO

1D
0.45%
1M
-0.31%
6M
17.05%
YTD
17.43%
1Y
24.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
9.66%

DBMF

1D
-1.11%
1M
-0.48%
6M
6.87%
YTD
13.66%
1Y
29.53%
3Y*
11.36%
5Y*
10.91%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
9.76%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$77.14MCA$70.96MCA$69.49M
CA$8.61KCA$14.11KCA$15.20K

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RGBM.TO and DBMF is 0.12, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025

0.13

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

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RGBM.TO
RGBM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
RGBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RGBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
RGBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
RGBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
RGBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) 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.


RGBM.TODBMFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.41

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.94

5.06

-1.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.89

18.14

-8.25

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RGBM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RGBM.TO 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

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RGBM.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.89%, smaller than the maximum DBMF drawdown of -21.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGBM.TO and DBMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RGBM.TODBMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.89%

-21.87%

+5.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.19%

-5.87%

-0.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.98%

-2.41%

+0.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.52%

-7.32%

+2.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.46%

1.63%

+0.83%

Volatility

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.68% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.78%. This indicates that RGBM.TO'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


RGBM.TODBMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.68%

2.78%

+0.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.24%

10.83%

-3.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.68%

13.64%

-2.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.75%

13.94%

-1.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.75%

14.00%

-1.25%

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RGBM.TO and DBMF have an expense ratio of 0.85%.


Dividends

RGBM.TO vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

RGBM.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.13%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%
RGBM.TO
Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RGBM.TO and DBMF have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RGBM.TO and DBMF have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

RGBM.TO is categorized as Multistrategy, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Return Stacked and iMGP.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RGBM.TO 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