RSBT vs. DBMF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RSBT (Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSBT is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Return Stacked, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iMGP. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RSBT returned 2.49%/yr vs 9.09%/yr for DBMF. Their 0.51 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RSBT charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

RSBT vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT) 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, RSBT achieves a 4.41% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 11.19% return.

RSBT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.85%
• 6M: 0.54%
• YTD: 4.41%
• 1Y: 22.66%
• 3Y*: 2.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -0.41%

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%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	$63.53M	$54.84M	$51.08M
RSBT Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF	$575.14K	$784.75K	$843.96K

RSBT vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RSBT Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF	4.41%	10.31%	-2.90%	-11.85%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	11.19%	13.85%	7.24%	-6.76%

Correlation

The correlation between RSBT and DBMF is 0.68, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2023	0.51

The correlation between RSBT and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (all time) to 0.68 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RSBT vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSBT

RSBT Risk / Return Rank: 74
RSBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
RSBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RSBT Omega Ratio Rank: 73
RSBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
RSBT Martin Ratio Rank: 72

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 90
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 91
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

RSBT vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT) 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.

	RSBT	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	2.18	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.10	2.87	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.44	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.73	4.54	-0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.86	15.42	-6.56

RSBT vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSBT 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

RSBT vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSBT drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSBT and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSBT	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.60%	-20.39%	-3.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.03%	-6.10%	+0.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.98%	-15.60%	-3.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.65%	-1.81%	-3.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.22%	-6.48%	-5.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	1.79%	+0.74%

Volatility

RSBT vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF (RSBT) has a higher volatility of 3.32% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.31%. This indicates that RSBT'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

	RSBT	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.32%	2.31%	+1.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.24%	9.81%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.01%	12.68%	+1.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.75%	12.44%	+1.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.75%	12.36%	+1.39%

RSBT vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSBT has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSBT vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

RSBT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.07%, less 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%
RSBT Return Stacked Bonds & Managed Futures ETF	3.07%	3.20%	0.00%	2.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSBT and DBMF in my portfolio?

RSBT and DBMF have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSBT or DBMF?

RSBT has higher volatility (3.32%) compared to DBMF (2.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSBT dropped -23.60% vs DBMF's -20.39%.

Which ETF is better, RSBT or DBMF?

On 3-year performance, DBMF leads with 9.09% vs 2.49% for RSBT. On fees, DBMF is cheaper at 0.85% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RSBT or DBMF?

Over the 3-year period, DBMF has performed better with a 9.09% return vs 2.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSBT or DBMF?

DBMF is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for RSBT.

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

DBMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.11%, compared with 3.07% for RSBT.

What is the main difference between RSBT and DBMF?

RSBT is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Return Stacked and iMGP. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for RSBT and 0.85% for DBMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.60), 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.