Data as of Nov 4, 2026.

vsOpen in the appCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Alternative ETFs

CTA vs IMF: Correlation to the S&P 500

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, CTA moved less with the S&P 500 than IMF: correlation −0.14 against +0.38.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about CTA and IMF

Net assets on Nov 3, 2026: $1.3bn for Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF and $304m for Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF.

At a glance
−0.14
CTA correlation with the S&P 500
+0.38
IMF correlation with the S&P 500
5.3%
CTA down-week capture
13.0%
IMF down-week capture
CTA Fell 5% as much as the S&P 500
Fell 5% as much as the S&P 500CTA in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, CTA −0.06%.SPY−1.07%CTA−0.06%Average week when SPY fell: 26 of 52, year to Nov 4, 2026Fell 5% as much as the S&P 500CTA in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, CTA −0.06%.SPY−1.07%CTA−0.06%Average week when SPY fell

CTA in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, CTA −0.06%.

IMF Fell 13% as much as the S&P 500
Fell 13% as much as the S&P 500IMF in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, IMF −0.14%.SPY−1.07%IMF−0.14%Average week when SPY fell: 26 of 52, year to Nov 4, 2026Fell 13% as much as the S&P 500IMF in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, IMF −0.14%.SPY−1.07%IMF−0.14%Average week when SPY fell

IMF in the 26 weeks SPY fell, year to Nov 4, 2026: SPY averaged −1.07%, IMF −0.14%.

Pair scorecard

IMF costs 0.21 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 15.5 points; CTA is 4.3 times larger.

CTA vs IMF: Correlation to the S&P 500
MeasureCTAIMF
Return
Total return, 1 year+4.6%+20.1%
Against its benchmark
Treasury bills, 52 weeks+3.7%
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.86%0.65%
Net assets, as of Nov 3, 2026$1.3bn$304m
Holdings
Holdings in commonnot published
Risk
Beta to the S&P 500−0.30: about 0.30% for each 1%+0.24: about 0.24% for each 1%
Its average week when the S&P 500 fellfell 0.06%fell 0.14%
ETFIQ Stock Diversification Score · CTA scores higher How much does it diversify a stock portfolio?
IQ Alternatives Score94.2CTA70.6IMF

How much it diversifies a stock portfolio, ranked against 17 systematic trend alternatives ETFs with a full year. 100 is best. How it is computed

2.9, the lowest in this set 94.2, the highest

One year of weekly moves against the S&P 500, within one strategy; it ignores what the fund returned. All alternatives ETFs ranked by it →

Method

Risk and return

Mar 28, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026 · 83 weekly returns
CTA IMF
Return
Total return edge CTA +9.6% +8.0%
Annualized edge CTA +5.9% +4.9%
Price return edge IMF +1.7% +6.9%
Risk
Volatility edge IMF 20.4% 9.2%
Max drawdown edge IMF −19.0% −13.3%
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge CTA 0.19 0.14
Sortino edge CTA 0.27 0.17
Calmar edge IMF 0.31 0.37
Reading

From Mar 2025 to Oct 2026, CTA returned more: +9.6% to +8.0%. IMF swung less: 9.2% to 20.4%. IMF fell less at its worst: −13.3% to −19.0%.

Full scorecard

9 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: CTA vs IMF: Correlation to the S&P 500
MeasureCTAIMFEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+9.6%+8.0%CTAPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+5.9%+4.9%CTATotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return+1.7%+6.9%IMFPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility20.4%9.2%IMFSpread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation14.1%7.6%IMFLike volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−19.0%−13.3%IMFDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.190.14CTAReturn above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.270.17CTAReturn above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Calmar0.310.37IMFAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 83 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

Window by window

Window by window: CTA vs IMF: Correlation to the S&P 500
Total return
WindowCTAIMF
3 months+6.2%+0.4%
6 months−10.8%0.0%
1 year+4.6%+20.1%
3 years+22.3%–
Since launchNot the same days: CTA Mar 2022 · IMF Mar 2025+37.8%+4.3%

– means no data for this window. Open this comparison in the app →

Side by side

CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF · Managed futures fund: follows price trends in futures on stocks, bonds, currencies and commodities, and can bet on falls as well as rises IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF · Managed futures fund: follows price trends in futures on stocks, bonds, currencies and commodities, and can bet on falls as well as rises
Strategy Managed futures Managed futures
Correlation with the S&P 500 −0.14 +0.38
Beta to the S&P 500 −0.30 +0.24
Down-week capture 5.3% 13.0%
Average week when the S&P 500 fell −0.06% −0.14%
The S&P 500 in those weeks −1.07% −1.07%
Total return, same 52 weeks +3.6% +19.2%
Against T-bills, percentage points 0.0 pts +15.6 pts
Expense ratio 0.86% 0.65%
First traded Mar 8, 2022 Mar 19, 2025
Net assets, as of Nov 3, 2026 $1.3bn $304m

As of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

One strategy, two funds

CTA and IMF both run a managed futures strategy. Over the same 52 weeks to Nov 4, 2026, CTA’s weekly returns had a correlation of −0.14 with the S&P 500 and IMF’s +0.38. In the 26 weeks the index fell, by 1.07% a week on average, CTA averaged −0.06% and IMF −0.14%. Over the same weeks, CTA finished level with cash and IMF finished 15.6 points ahead of cash.

Client brief:

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

IMF flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
CTA

CTA is a managed futures fund. ETFIQ measures what every alternatives fund is sold on: whether it moves differently from the stock market. Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, its weekly returns had a correlation of −0.14 with the S&P 500’s and a beta of −0.30, so for each 1% the index moved it moved about 0.30% the other way. The S&P 500 fell in 26 of those 52 weeks, by 1.07% on average. In the same weeks CTA fell 0.06% on average, a down-week capture of 5.3%. Over the same 52 weeks CTA returned +3.6% and a Treasury bill fund +3.7%, so it finished level with cash.

IMF

IMF is a managed futures fund. Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, its weekly returns had a correlation of +0.38 with the S&P 500’s and a beta of +0.24, so for each 1% the index moved it moved about 0.24% the same way. In the same weeks IMF fell 0.14% on average, a down-week capture of 13.0%. Over the same 52 weeks IMF returned +19.2% and a Treasury bill fund +3.7%, so it finished 15.6 percentage points ahead of cash.

Questions people ask

Which moved less with the S&P 500, CTA or IMF?
Over the 52 weeks to Nov 4, 2026, CTA’s weekly returns had a correlation of −0.14 with the S&P 500 and IMF’s +0.38, so CTA moved less with the index.
Which did better when the S&P 500 fell, CTA or IMF?
In the 26 weeks the S&P 500 fell, by 1.07% a week on average, CTA averaged −0.06% and IMF −0.14%, so CTA returned more in those weeks.
Which earned more than cash, CTA or IMF?
Over the same weeks, CTA finished level with cash and IMF finished 15.6 percentage points ahead of cash. Cash here is BIL, a fund of Treasury bills.
Which is cheaper, CTA or IMF?
CTA charges 0.86% a year and IMF charges 0.65%, so IMF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, CTA against IMF, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/alternatives/cta-vs-imf

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.