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

Performance

RLY vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) 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, RLY achieves a 17.13% return, which is significantly higher than DBMF's 12.42% return.


RLY

1D
-0.30%
1M
-0.30%
YTD
17.13%
6M
18.27%
1Y
31.78%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.43%
10Y*
8.56%

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)

RLY vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
17.13%20.26%2.53%2.56%7.86%22.85%-0.59%6.16%
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
12.42%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%11.49%1.80%10.67%

Correlation

The correlation between RLY and DBMF is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.57

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

0.32

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2019

0.25

Over the past year, RLY and DBMF have become more correlated (0.57) than their long-term average of 0.25, meaning their price movements have been converging.

RLY vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RLY
DBMF

Energy

30.1%
3.9%

Basic Materials

25.1%
2.2%

Industrials

16.5%
8.4%

Utilities

15.9%
2.3%

Real Estate

5.4%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
6.1%

Consumer Cyclical

2.6%
11.0%

Healthcare

0.8%
12.7%

Financial Services

0.0%
12.5%

Communication Services

-

8.6%

Technology

-

29.8%

Energy

RLY
30.1%
DBMF
3.9%

Basic Materials

RLY
25.1%
DBMF
2.2%

Industrials

RLY
16.5%
DBMF
8.4%

Utilities

RLY
15.9%
DBMF
2.3%

Real Estate

RLY
5.4%
DBMF
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

RLY
3.6%
DBMF
6.1%

Consumer Cyclical

RLY
2.6%
DBMF
11.0%

Healthcare

RLY
0.8%
DBMF
12.7%

Financial Services

RLY
0.0%
DBMF
12.5%

Communication Services

RLY

-

DBMF
8.6%

Technology

RLY

-

DBMF
29.8%

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

RLY vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RLY
RLY Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

RLY vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) 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.


RLYDBMFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.17

2.59

+0.58

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.33

3.39

+0.95

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.55

+0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

8.60

5.17

+3.43

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

31.17

19.07

+12.10

RLY vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RLY Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RLY 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RLYDBMFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.17

2.59

+0.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.68

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.77

-0.40

Drawdowns

RLY vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RLY drawdown since its inception was -37.75%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RLY and DBMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RLYDBMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.75%

-20.39%

-17.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.71%

-6.10%

+2.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.08%

-15.60%

+5.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.94%

-20.39%

+1.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.60%

0.00%

-1.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.46%

-6.59%

-2.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

1.65%

-0.63%

Volatility

RLY vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) has a higher volatility of 3.00% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.12%. This indicates that RLY'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


RLYDBMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.00%

2.12%

+0.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.15%

9.76%

-1.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.06%

12.17%

-2.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.54%

12.52%

+1.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.81%

12.41%

+1.40%

RLY vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RLY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

RLY vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

RLY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than DBMF's 5.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.09%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
2.86%3.24%3.31%3.71%5.66%12.15%2.16%3.45%2.76%1.85%2.07%1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


RLY and DBMF have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RLY has higher volatility (3.00%) compared to DBMF (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RLY dropped -37.75% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

On 5-year performance, RLY leads with 10.43% vs 8.46% for DBMF. On fees, RLY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, DBMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, RLY has performed better with a 10.43% return vs 8.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RLY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.09%, compared with 2.86% for RLY.

RLY is categorized as Hedge Fund, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for RLY and 0.85% for DBMF.

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.59), 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 RLY 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