AOM vs. CTAP
AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) and CTAP (Simplify US Equity PLUS Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. AOM is passively managed, while CTAP is actively managed. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AOM charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CTAP.
Performance
AOM vs. CTAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AOM achieves a 4.79% return, which is significantly higher than CTAP's 4.10% return.
AOM
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -0.06%
- YTD
- 4.79%
- 6M
- 4.29%
- 1Y
- 12.57%
- 3Y*
- 10.68%
- 5Y*
- 4.70%
- 10Y*
- 6.41%
CTAP
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- -14.15%
- YTD
- 4.10%
- 6M
- 2.69%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOM vs. CTAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 4.79% | 0.63% |
CTAP Simplify US Equity PLUS Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 4.10% | 2.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between AOM and CTAP is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2025 | 0.21 |
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
AOM vs. CTAP — Risk / Return Rank
AOM
CTAP
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
AOM vs. CTAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and Simplify US Equity PLUS Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTAP). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| AOM | CTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.47 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.61 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AOM vs. CTAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AOM drawdown since its inception was -19.96%, which is greater than CTAP's maximum drawdown of -18.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOM and CTAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AOM | CTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.96% | -18.86% | -1.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.96% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.66% | -18.45% | +17.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.69% | -3.33% | +0.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.19% | — | — |
Volatility
AOM vs. CTAP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AOM | CTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.71% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.70% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.89% | 24.56% | -17.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.21% | 24.56% | -16.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.94% | 24.56% | -16.62% |
AOM vs. CTAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
AOM has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than CTAP's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
AOM vs. CTAP - Dividend Comparison
AOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.99%, more than CTAP's 1.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 2.99% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
CTAP Simplify US Equity PLUS Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 1.91% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AOM and CTAP have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CTAP is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CTAP is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AOM.
AOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.99%, compared with 1.91% for CTAP.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AOM and 0.10% for CTAP.
Find the right allocation for AOM and CTAP
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