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

Performance

TDSC vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) and iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

TDSC vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
TDSC
Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF
3.10%6.56%7.10%7.63%-19.67%14.81%-0.11%
DBMF
iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
7.87%13.85%7.24%-8.94%21.61%11.49%3.32%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TDSC achieves a 3.10% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 7.87% return.


TDSC

1D
1.72%
1M
-3.51%
YTD
3.10%
6M
3.92%
1Y
7.13%
3Y*
8.26%
5Y*
2.52%
10Y*

DBMF

1D
-0.20%
1M
-3.82%
YTD
7.87%
6M
15.44%
1Y
26.29%
3Y*
9.90%
5Y*
8.63%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


TDSC vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

TDSC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

TDSC vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

TDSC
TDSC Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
TDSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TDSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
TDSC Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
TDSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
TDSC Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

DBMF
DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

TDSC vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) and iM 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.


TDSCDBMFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.58

2.19

-1.61

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.79

2.98

-2.19

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.46

-0.34

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.62

4.25

-3.63

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.23

18.51

-16.28

TDSC vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TDSC Sharpe Ratio is 0.58, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TDSC and DBMF, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TDSCDBMFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.58

2.19

-1.61

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.25

0.68

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.74

-0.46

Correlation

The correlation between TDSC and DBMF is 0.21, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

TDSC vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

TDSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.17%, less than DBMF's 5.30% yield.


TTM2025202420232022202120202019
TDSC
Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF
2.17%2.92%2.06%2.06%1.76%1.11%0.54%0.00%
DBMF
iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
5.30%5.91%5.75%2.91%7.72%10.38%0.86%9.35%

Drawdowns

TDSC vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TDSC drawdown since its inception was -21.51%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDSC and DBMF.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


TDSCDBMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.51%

-20.39%

-1.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.13%

-6.10%

-6.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.51%

-20.39%

-1.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.72%

-3.82%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.65%

-6.70%

-2.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.39%

1.40%

+1.99%

Volatility

TDSC vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cabana Target Drawdown 10 ETF (TDSC) is 3.72%, while iM DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) has a volatility of 5.24%. This indicates that TDSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


TDSCDBMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.72%

5.24%

-1.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.10%

11.10%

-4.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.43%

12.09%

+0.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.32%

12.66%

-2.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.29%

12.48%

-2.19%