XDWS.L vs. DBMF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XDWS.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C) and DBMF (iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XDWS.L is a Consumer Staples Equities fund tracking the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while DBMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iM Global Partners. XDWS.L is passively managed, while DBMF is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDWS.L returned 3.97%/yr vs 8.37%/yr for DBMF. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XDWS.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DBMF.

Performance

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) 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, XDWS.L achieves a 3.29% return, which is significantly lower than DBMF's 11.95% return.

XDWS.L

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: -2.75%
• YTD: 3.29%
• 6M: 3.85%
• 1Y: 0.79%
• 3Y*: 6.17%
• 5Y*: 3.97%
• 10Y*: 5.57%

DBMF

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 11.95%
• 6M: 14.16%
• 1Y: 30.19%
• 3Y*: 10.79%
• 5Y*: 8.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XDWS.L Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C	3.29%	9.31%	5.69%	1.96%	-5.24%	12.84%	7.75%	9.32%
DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF	11.95%	13.85%	7.24%	-8.94%	21.61%	11.49%	1.80%	10.67%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWS.L and DBMF is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2019	0.02

The correlation between XDWS.L and DBMF shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (5 years) to 0.06 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XDWS.L	DBMF
Consumer Defensive	97.3%	6.1%
Consumer Cyclical	2.2%	11.0%
Financial Services	0.2%	12.5%
Healthcare	0.2%	12.7%
Basic Materials	-	2.2%
Communication Services	-	8.6%
Energy	-	3.9%
Industrials	-	8.4%
Real Estate	-	2.5%
Technology	-	29.8%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

XDWS.L vs. DBMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDWS.L

XDWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 10
XDWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
XDWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
XDWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9
XDWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
XDWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 10

DBMF

DBMF Risk / Return Rank: 83
DBMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
DBMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
DBMF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
DBMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
DBMF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) 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.

	XDWS.L	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.06	2.49	-2.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.17	3.27	-3.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.53	-0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.08	4.97	-4.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.18	18.33	-18.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.06, which is lower than the DBMF Sharpe Ratio of 2.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWS.L 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XDWS.L	DBMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06	2.49	-2.43
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.67	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.47	0.77	-0.30

Drawdowns

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWS.L drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, which is greater than DBMF's maximum drawdown of -20.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWS.L and DBMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	XDWS.L	DBMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-20.39%	-3.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.74%	-6.10%	-3.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.52%	-15.60%	+4.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.53%	-20.39%	+2.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-23.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.95%	-0.41%	-8.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.20%	-6.58%	+2.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.38%	1.65%	+2.73%

Volatility

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) at 2.18%. This indicates that XDWS.L'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

	XDWS.L	DBMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.62%	2.18%	+2.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.21%	9.77%	+0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.38%	12.17%	+0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.11%	12.52%	-0.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.48%	12.41%	+0.07%

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDWS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than DBMF's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

XDWS.L vs. DBMF - Dividend Comparison

XDWS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.11%.

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%
XDWS.L Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XDWS.L and DBMF in my portfolio?

XDWS.L and DBMF have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XDWS.L or DBMF?

On fees, XDWS.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XDWS.L or DBMF?

XDWS.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DBMF.

What is the main difference between XDWS.L and DBMF?

XDWS.L is categorized as Consumer Staples Equities, while DBMF is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iM Global Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWS.L and 0.85% for DBMF.