DBMF vs IVV
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. DBMF delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | DBMF | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $2.1B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.16% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 12 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +12.27% | +13.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +28.64% | +23.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.27% | +21.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.19% | +13.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.6% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -20.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iMGP Funds | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | May 7, 2019 | May 15, 2000 |
DBMF vs IVV Performance
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF (DBMF) is a ETF from iMGP Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year DBMF returned +28.64% while IVV returned +23.01%. Year to date, DBMF is up 12.27% versus a gain of 13.80% for IVV.
Over three years, DBMF compounded at +9.27% per year against +21.77% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +9.19% and +13.39% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, DBMF has the edge at +7.89% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 11.6% for DBMF. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -20.4% for DBMF and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.15. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DBMF charges 0.85% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DBMF currently yields 5.16% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
DBMF and IVV share 0 holdings out of 506 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, DBMF or IVV?
DBMF has an expense ratio of 0.85% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, DBMF or IVV?
Over the past year DBMF returned +28.64% vs +23.01% for IVV, so DBMF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), DBMF annualized +7.89% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, DBMF or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 11.6% for DBMF. Worst drawdown: DBMF -20.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both DBMF and IVV?
DBMF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of -0.15, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between DBMF and IVV?
DBMF and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, DBMF or IVV?
DBMF yields 5.16% while IVV yields 1.09%, so DBMF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.