Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
BITO vs DBMF: how they differ
BITO is a spot crypto ETP and DBMF an equity index fund, and over the year DBMF returned more, +25.4% against −34.8%.
ProShares Bitcoin ETF and iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF.
| BITO ProShares Bitcoin ETF | DBMF iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | ProShares | iMGP |
| What it is | Bitcoin | iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy |
| Total return, 1 year | −34.8% | +25.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −52.3 pts | +7.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.95% | 0.85% |
| Holdings | 1 | not filed |
BITO in plain words
BITO is a digital asset fund tracking the Bitcoin. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −34.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.95% a year. It sat 40.3% below its high of Oct 6, 2025 on Sep 11, 2026.
DBMF in plain words
DBMF is an index equity fund tracking the iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +25.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.85% a year.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, BITO or DBMF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BITO returned −34.8% and DBMF returned +25.4%, so DBMF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, BITO or DBMF?
- BITO charges 0.95% a year and DBMF charges 0.85%, so DBMF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, BITO against DBMF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BITO-DBMF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources