Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

DBMF vs SCHB: how they differ

DBMF and SCHB are both equity index funds, and over the year DBMF returned more, +25.4% against +17.2%.

iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF and Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF.

DBMF and SCHB on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DBMF
iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF
SCHB
Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriMGPSchwab
What it isiMGP DBi Managed Futures StrategyUS broad market, book from ITOT
Total return, 1 year+25.4%+17.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+7.9 pts−0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.85%not published

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.

SCHB in plain words

SCHB is an index equity fund tracking the US broad market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DBMF or SCHB?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DBMF returned +25.4% and SCHB returned +17.2%, so DBMF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

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.

DBMF against SCHB, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, DBMF against SCHB, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DBMF-SCHB Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources