Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

CTA vs IMF: which moved less with stocks?

Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, CTA moved less with the S&P 500 than IMF: correlation −0.26 against +0.22.

Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF and Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF.

−0.26CTA correlation with the S&P 500
+0.22IMF correlation with the S&P 500
−78.5%CTA down-week capture
−22.7%IMF down-week capture

ETFIQ Diversifier Score: CTA scores higher

How much does it diversify a stock portfolio?

CTA 95.3IMF 814.8, the lowest in this set98.0, the highest

A percentile among the 63 alternatives ETFs with a full year. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All alternatives ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed

CTARose when the S&P 500 fell
SPY−1.24%CTA+0.97%Average week when SPY fell: 22 of 52, year to Sep 18, 2026SPY−1.24%CTA+0.97%Average week when SPY fell
IMFRose when the S&P 500 fell
SPY−1.24%IMF+0.28%Average week when SPY fell: 22 of 52, year to Sep 18, 2026SPY−1.24%IMF+0.28%Average week when SPY fell

One strategy, two funds

CTA and IMF both run a managed futures strategy. Over the same 52 weeks to Sep 18, 2026, CTA’s weekly returns had a correlation of −0.26 with the S&P 500 and IMF’s +0.22. In the 22 weeks the index fell, by 1.24% a week on average, CTA averaged +0.97% and IMF +0.28%. Over the same weeks, CTA finished 10.1 percentage points ahead of cash and IMF finished 19.4 points ahead of cash.

Performance, window by window

CTA and IMF over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnvs the S&P 500
CTAIMFCTAIMF
3 months+11.3%+4.1%+9.0 pts+1.9 pts
6 months+1.2%+7.7%−16.9 pts−10.4 pts
1 year+13.8%+23.1%−2.8 pts+6.5 pts
3 years+31.9%not published−46.5 ptsnot published
Since launch+52.5%+7.4%−42.5 pts−29.6 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
CTA and IMF on the same fields, as of Sep 18, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
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
IssuerSimplifyInvesco
StrategyManaged futuresManaged futures
Correlation with the S&P 500−0.26+0.22
Beta to the S&P 500−0.47+0.12
Down-week capture−78.5%−22.7%
Average week when the S&P 500 fell+0.97%+0.28%
The S&P 500 in those weeks−1.24%−1.24%
Total return, same 52 weeks+13.7%+23.1%
Against T-bills, percentage points+10.1 pts+19.4 pts
Expense ratio0.75%0.65%
ListedMar 8, 2022Mar 19, 2025
Net assets$1.5bn$319m

CTA in plain words

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 Sep 18, 2026, its weekly returns had a correlation of −0.26 with the S&P 500’s and a beta of −0.47, so for each 1% the index moved it moved about 0.47% the other way. The S&P 500 fell in 22 of those 52 weeks, by 1.24% on average. In the same weeks CTA rose 0.97% on average, a down-week capture of −78.5%. Over the same 52 weeks CTA returned +13.7% and a Treasury bill fund +3.6%, so it finished 10.1 percentage points ahead of cash.

IMF in plain words

IMF is a managed futures fund. Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, its weekly returns had a correlation of +0.22 with the S&P 500’s and a beta of +0.12, so for each 1% the index moved it moved about 0.12% the same way. In the same weeks IMF rose 0.28% on average, a down-week capture of −22.7%. Over the same 52 weeks IMF returned +23.1% and a Treasury bill fund +3.6%, so it finished 19.4 percentage points ahead of cash.

Questions people ask

Which moved less with the S&P 500, CTA or IMF?
Over the 52 weeks to Sep 18, 2026, CTA’s weekly returns had a correlation of −0.26 with the S&P 500 and IMF’s +0.22, so CTA moved less with the index.
Which did better when the S&P 500 fell, CTA or IMF?
In the 22 weeks the S&P 500 fell, by 1.24% a week on average, CTA averaged +0.97% and IMF +0.28%, so CTA returned more in those weeks.
Which earned more than cash, CTA or IMF?
Over the same weeks, CTA finished 10.1 percentage points ahead of cash and IMF finished 19.4 percentage points ahead of cash. Cash here is BIL, a fund of Treasury bills.
Which is cheaper, CTA or IMF?
CTA charges 0.75% a year and IMF charges 0.65%, so IMF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

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.

CTA against IMF, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 18, 2026. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, CTA against IMF, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/alternatives/cta-vs-imf Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources