SFGV vs. DBC
SFGV (Sequoia Global Value ETF) and DBC (Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - SFGV is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sequoia Financial, while DBC is a Commodities fund tracking the DBIQ Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Index Excess Return. SFGV is actively managed, while DBC is passively managed. Over the past year, SFGV returned 26.89% vs 34.92% for DBC. Their 0.05 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SFGV charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBC.
Performance
SFGV vs. DBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SFGV achieves a 16.33% return, which is significantly lower than DBC's 27.37% return.
SFGV
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 2.57%
- 6M
- 7.35%
- YTD
- 16.33%
- 1Y
- 26.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 18.33%
DBC
- 1D
- 0.60%
- 1M
- 5.48%
- 6M
- 17.73%
- YTD
- 27.37%
- 1Y
- 34.92%
- 3Y*
- 9.99%
- 5Y*
- 11.48%
- 10Y*
- 8.90%
- ALL TIME*
- 1.88%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29.84M | $30.72M | $31.47M | |
| $481.34K | $451.54K | $468.54K |
SFGV vs. DBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF | 16.33% | 18.84% | 11.04% |
DBC Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund | 27.37% | 8.10% | 3.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between SFGV and DBC is -0.16, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2024 | 0.05 |
The correlation between SFGV and DBC shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
SFGV vs. DBC — Risk / Return Rank
SFGV
DBC
SFGV vs. DBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund (DBC). 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.
| SFGV | DBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.30 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.23 | 2.12 | +1.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.41 | 6.91 | +5.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SFGV vs. DBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SFGV drawdown since its inception was -14.51%, smaller than the maximum DBC drawdown of -76.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SFGV and DBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SFGV | DBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.51% | -76.36% | +61.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.36% | -16.54% | +8.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.34% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.71% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -26.32% | +26.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.80% | -46.06% | +44.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.17% | 5.07% | -2.90% |
Volatility
SFGV vs. DBC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) is 3.00%, while Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund (DBC) has a volatility of 7.61%. This indicates that SFGV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SFGV | DBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.00% | 7.61% | -4.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.82% | 16.61% | -7.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.52% | 19.70% | -8.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.08% | 19.33% | -6.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.08% | 17.89% | -4.81% |
SFGV vs. DBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
SFGV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than DBC's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
SFGV vs. DBC - Dividend Comparison
SFGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%, less than DBC's 2.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBC Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund | 2.61% | 3.33% | 5.22% | 4.94% | 0.59% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.59% | 1.30% |
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF | 2.29% | 2.52% | 2.23% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SFGV and DBC have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DBC has higher volatility (7.61%) compared to SFGV (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SFGV dropped -14.51% vs DBC's -76.36%.
On 1-year performance, DBC leads with 34.92% vs 26.89% for SFGV. On fees, SFGV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, SFGV has been the lower-risk option at 3.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, DBC has performed better with a 34.92% return vs 26.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SFGV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBC.
DBC has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 2.29% for SFGV.
SFGV is categorized as Global Equities, while DBC is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Sequoia Financial and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for SFGV and 0.85% for DBC.
SFGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.78), 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 SFGV and DBC
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