XBJA vs. DCMT
XBJA (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January) and DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XBJA is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, XBJA returned 12.24% vs 29.63% for DCMT. Their -0.02 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. XBJA charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for DCMT.
Performance
XBJA vs. DCMT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XBJA achieves a 7.34% return, which is significantly lower than DCMT's 24.74% return.
XBJA
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 6.69%
- YTD
- 7.34%
- 1Y
- 12.24%
- 3Y*
- 11.59%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 7.37%
DCMT
- 1D
- -1.11%
- 1M
- 6.02%
- 6M
- 16.61%
- YTD
- 24.74%
- 1Y
- 29.63%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.42%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $307.72K | $268.91K | $199.57K | |
| $109.00K | $114.05K | $252.46K |
XBJA vs. DCMT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
XBJA Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January | 7.34% | 11.12% | 10.27% |
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF | 24.74% | 6.04% | 3.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between XBJA and DCMT is -0.22, 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. | -0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | -0.02 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between XBJA and DCMT has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.02 to -0.22, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
XBJA vs. DCMT — Risk / Return Rank
XBJA
DCMT
XBJA vs. DCMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). 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.
| XBJA | DCMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.27 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.30 | 1.86 | +0.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.30 | 6.16 | +7.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XBJA vs. DCMT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XBJA drawdown since its inception was -17.42%, which is greater than DCMT's maximum drawdown of -15.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBJA and DCMT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XBJA | DCMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.42% | -15.96% | -1.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.33% | -15.96% | +10.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.57% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -10.46% | +10.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.04% | -3.63% | +0.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.92% | 4.82% | -3.90% |
Volatility
XBJA vs. DCMT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) is 1.44%, while DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a volatility of 5.57%. This indicates that XBJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DCMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XBJA | DCMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.44% | 5.57% | -4.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.37% | 16.66% | -11.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.99% | 19.04% | -13.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.43% | 16.06% | -4.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.43% | 16.06% | -4.63% |
XBJA vs. DCMT - Expense Ratio Comparison
XBJA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than DCMT's 0.66% expense ratio.
Dividends
XBJA vs. DCMT - Dividend Comparison
XBJA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.94%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF | 2.94% | 3.67% | 1.59% |
XBJA Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XBJA and DCMT have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DCMT has higher volatility (5.57%) compared to XBJA (1.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBJA dropped -17.42% vs DCMT's -15.96%.
On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 29.63% vs 12.24% for XBJA. On fees, DCMT is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, XBJA has been the lower-risk option at 1.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 29.63% return vs 12.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DCMT is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBJA.
DCMT has the higher dividend yield at 2.94%, compared with 0.00% for XBJA.
XBJA is categorized as Defined Outcome, while DCMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and DoubleLine. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBJA and 0.66% for DCMT.
XBJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.56), 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 XBJA and DCMT
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