Over the year to September 22, 2026, ETFIQ measured 63 alternatives ETFs against the S&P 500 in the 23 weeks out of 52 when the index fell, by an average of 1.13% per down week. Eleven of the 63 funds rose, on average, in those same weeks. Across all 63, the median fund's down-week capture was 41%, meaning the typical fund moved about 41% as much as the index did on the way down. That is the core promise these funds are sold on: that they behave differently from stocks when stocks fall. The data shows a mixed record against that promise, with wide variation by strategy and by fund.
The seven strategies did not respond alike. Hedged equity funds, the largest group with 21 funds, had a median correlation of +0.91 with the S&P 500 and a median down-week capture of 62%, meaning they still moved with the market most of the time, just by less. Managed futures funds, 18 in number, had a lower median correlation of +0.43 and a smaller median down-week capture of 36%, three of them, and four rose on down weeks. Long-short equity funds, with a median correlation of +0.69, had the highest median down-week capture of the larger groups at 74.9%, closer to matching the index's declines. Global macro, with only two funds, showed a median down-week capture over 100%, meaning the typical fund in that small group moved more than the index on the way down, not less. Market neutral, with a single fund, showed a negative correlation of −0.68 and a down-week capture of −141.6%, rising sharply in down weeks, though it also finished behind T-bills.
At the fund level, BTAL posted the largest average gain in down weeks, up 1.60% on average, with a correlation of −0.68, but it lagged T-bills by 24.5 points over the same period. CTA and KMLM, both managed futures funds, also averaged gains in down weeks, up 0.87% and 0.57% respectively, and both finished ahead of T-bills. At the other end, HFEQ, a long-short equity fund, had a down-week capture of 152.7%, meaning it fell further than the index on average in its down weeks, while still finishing 14.0 points ahead of T-bills over the full period.
Holding up in down weeks is a separate question from overall return. Of the 63 funds, 51 finished ahead of T-bills over the same 52 weeks. Among the 11 funds that rose on average when the index fell, only 7 also beat T-bills, meaning four of the funds that did what they were designed to do in down weeks still lagged the simple return on Treasury bills over the full year. QIS, for example, had a down-week capture of 45.4% but finished 43.2 points behind T-bills, the widest gap in the table.
Readers can check any fund's current correlation, down-week capture and standing against T-bills on the live desk, where the same weekly method is applied to the most recent 52 weeks.