Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
CTA vs ILF: how they differ
CTA and ILF hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and ILF returned more over the year.
Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF and iShares Latin America 40 ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CTA and ILF hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CTA | Only in ILF |
|---|---|
| SIMPLIFY EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS 81.69% | VALE S.A. 8.48% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 3.72% | Nu Holdings Ltd. 8.25% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 3.44% | Itau Unibanco Holding S.A. 7.11% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 2.76% | Grupo Mexico, S.A.B. de C.V. 5.68% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 2.75% | Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras) 5.19% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 2.20% | Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras) 4.83% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 1.37% | CREDICORP LTD. 4.26% |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - BUREAU OF THE 1.07% | Grupo Financiero Banorte, S.A.B. de C.V. 4.11% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026.
| CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF | ILF iShares Latin America 40 ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Simplify | iShares |
| What it is | Simplify Managed Futures Strategy | Latin America 40 |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.0% | +33.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −0.5 pts | +15.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.47% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 10 | 45 |
CTA in plain words
CTA is an index equity fund tracking the Simplify Managed Futures Strategy. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 10 positions, with the top ten at 100.0%. It sat 5.3% below its high of May 4, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
ILF in plain words
ILF is an index equity fund tracking the Latin America 40. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +33.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.47% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 45 positions, with the top ten at 55.1%. It sat 4.4% below its high of Apr 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CTA or ILF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CTA returned +17.0% and ILF returned +33.4%, so ILF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, CTA or ILF?
- CTA charges 0.75% a year and ILF charges 0.47%, so ILF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do CTA and ILF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of CTA and 0% of ILF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
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, CTA against ILF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CTA-ILF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources