RLY vs. DBMF
RLY (SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RLY is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by State Street, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RLY returned 10.43%/yr vs 8.46%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RLY charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.
Performance
RLY vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
RLY vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Basic Materials
Industrials
Utilities
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Financial Services
Communication Services
-
Technology
-
Energy
RLY
DBMF
Basic Materials
RLY
DBMF
Industrials
RLY
DBMF
Utilities
RLY
DBMF
Real Estate
RLY
DBMF
Consumer Defensive
RLY
DBMF
Consumer Cyclical
RLY
DBMF
Healthcare
RLY
DBMF
Financial Services
RLY
DBMF
Communication Services
RLY
-
DBMF
Technology
RLY
-
DBMF
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
RLY
DBMF
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.
| RLY | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.17 | 2.59 | +0.58 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.33 | 3.39 | +0.95 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.55 | +0.04 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 8.60 | 5.17 | +3.43 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 31.17 | 19.07 | +12.10 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RLY | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| RLY | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.60% | 0.00% | -1.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.46% | -6.59% | -2.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| RLY | DBMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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