PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AGGH vs. CTA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AGGH vs. CTA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Aggregate Bond ETF (AGGH) and Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGGH achieves a 0.48% return, which is significantly lower than CTA's 12.30% return.


AGGH

1D
-0.32%
1M
0.30%
YTD
0.48%
6M
0.53%
1Y
9.06%
3Y*
4.70%
5Y*
10Y*

CTA

1D
0.54%
1M
-7.86%
YTD
12.30%
6M
13.80%
1Y
15.57%
3Y*
11.79%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AGGH vs. CTA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
AGGH
Simplify Aggregate Bond ETF
0.48%8.23%1.97%8.47%-8.98%
CTA
Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF
12.30%0.88%24.15%-2.23%9.55%

Correlation

The correlation between AGGH and CTA is -0.28, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2022

-0.27

AGGH vs. CTA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AGGH
CTA

Financial Services

79.5%
-49.1%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

AGGH
79.5%
CTA
-49.1%

Basic Materials

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Communication Services

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Consumer Cyclical

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Consumer Defensive

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Energy

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Healthcare

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Industrials

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Real Estate

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Technology

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Utilities

AGGH

-

CTA

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AGGH vs. CTA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AGGH
AGGH Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
AGGH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AGGH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
AGGH Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
AGGH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
AGGH Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

CTA
CTA Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
CTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
CTA Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
CTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
CTA Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AGGH vs. CTA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Aggregate Bond ETF (AGGH) and Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


AGGHCTADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.28

0.78

+0.50

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.92

1.12

+0.81

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.15

+0.10

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

1.42

+1.51

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.57

3.72

+4.84

AGGH vs. CTA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGGH Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is higher than the CTA Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGGH and CTA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AGGHCTADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.28

0.78

+0.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.62

-0.35

Drawdowns

AGGH vs. CTA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGGH drawdown since its inception was -13.26%, smaller than the maximum CTA drawdown of -18.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGGH and CTA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AGGHCTADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.26%

-18.07%

+4.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.10%

-11.00%

+7.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.67%

-11.23%

+2.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.58%

-7.86%

+6.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.45%

-5.67%

+1.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.06%

4.19%

-3.13%

Volatility

AGGH vs. CTA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Simplify Aggregate Bond ETF (AGGH) is 1.54%, while Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) has a volatility of 7.76%. This indicates that AGGH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AGGHCTADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.54%

7.76%

-6.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.33%

17.30%

-13.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.10%

20.12%

-13.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.46%

16.58%

-8.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.46%

16.58%

-8.12%

AGGH vs. CTA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGGH has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than CTA's 0.78% expense ratio.


Dividends

AGGH vs. CTA - Dividend Comparison

AGGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.53%, more than CTA's 4.85% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
AGGH
Simplify Aggregate Bond ETF
7.53%7.54%8.97%9.51%2.11%
CTA
Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF
4.85%3.19%4.80%7.78%6.58%

Frequently Asked Questions


AGGH and CTA have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CTA has higher volatility (7.76%) compared to AGGH (1.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGGH dropped -13.26% vs CTA's -18.07%.

On 3-year performance, CTA leads with 11.79% vs 4.70% for AGGH. On fees, AGGH is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, AGGH has been the lower-risk option at 1.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, CTA has performed better with a 11.79% return vs 4.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AGGH is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for CTA.

AGGH has the higher dividend yield at 7.53%, compared with 4.85% for CTA.

AGGH is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while CTA is Systematic Trend. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for AGGH and 0.78% for CTA.

AGGH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 0.78), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AGGH and CTA

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer