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

Performance

CTA vs. ASMF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CTA achieves a 12.30% return, which is significantly higher than ASMF's 9.39% return.


CTA

1D
0.54%
1M
-7.86%
YTD
12.30%
6M
13.80%
1Y
15.57%
3Y*
11.79%
5Y*
10Y*

ASMF

1D
0.01%
1M
1.73%
YTD
9.39%
6M
11.45%
1Y
17.16%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CTA vs. ASMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CTA
Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF
12.30%0.88%5.71%
ASMF
Virtus AlphaSimplex Managed Futures ETF
9.39%1.16%-3.56%

Correlation

The correlation between CTA and ASMF is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 17, 2024

0.32

CTA vs. ASMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CTA
ASMF

Basic Materials

-

7.3%

Communication Services

-

5.5%

Consumer Cyclical

-

10.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.2%

Energy

-

4.4%

Healthcare

-

4.4%

Industrials

-

12.7%

Real Estate

-

1.2%

Technology

-

23.3%

Utilities

-

3.1%

Financial Services

-49.1%
23.9%

Basic Materials

CTA

-

ASMF
7.3%

Communication Services

CTA

-

ASMF
5.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CTA

-

ASMF
10.2%

Consumer Defensive

CTA

-

ASMF
4.2%

Energy

CTA

-

ASMF
4.4%

Healthcare

CTA

-

ASMF
4.4%

Industrials

CTA

-

ASMF
12.7%

Real Estate

CTA

-

ASMF
1.2%

Technology

CTA

-

ASMF
23.3%

Utilities

CTA

-

ASMF
3.1%

Financial Services

CTA
-49.1%
ASMF
23.9%

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

CTA vs. ASMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

ASMF
ASMF Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
ASMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASMF Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
ASMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASMF Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
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.

CTA vs. ASMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) and Virtus AlphaSimplex Managed Futures ETF (ASMF). 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.


CTAASMFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.29

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.42

3.43

-2.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.72

9.07

-5.35

CTA vs. ASMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTA Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is lower than the ASMF Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTA and ASMF, 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


CTAASMFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.78

1.55

-0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.30

+0.32

Drawdowns

CTA vs. ASMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTA drawdown since its inception was -18.07%, which is greater than ASMF's maximum drawdown of -15.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTA and ASMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CTAASMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.07%

-15.31%

-2.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-5.02%

-5.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.86%

-1.34%

-6.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.67%

-7.61%

+1.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.19%

1.90%

+2.29%

Volatility

CTA vs. ASMF - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) has a higher volatility of 7.76% compared to Virtus AlphaSimplex Managed Futures ETF (ASMF) at 2.59%. This indicates that CTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CTAASMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.76%

2.59%

+5.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.30%

9.28%

+8.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.12%

11.16%

+8.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.58%

10.97%

+5.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.58%

10.97%

+5.61%

CTA vs. ASMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CTA has a 0.78% expense ratio, which is lower than ASMF's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

CTA vs. ASMF - Dividend Comparison

CTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%, more than ASMF's 0.20% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
ASMF
Virtus AlphaSimplex Managed Futures ETF
0.20%0.22%1.66%0.00%0.00%
CTA
Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF
4.85%3.19%4.80%7.78%6.58%

Frequently Asked Questions


CTA and ASMF have a correlation of 0.38, 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 ASMF (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTA dropped -18.07% vs ASMF's -15.31%.

On 1-year performance, ASMF leads with 17.16% vs 15.57% for CTA. On fees, CTA is cheaper at 0.78% per year. On volatility, ASMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ASMF has performed better with a 17.16% return vs 15.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CTA is cheaper with a 0.78% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for ASMF.

CTA has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 0.20% for ASMF.

They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Virtus. Their fees differ too: 0.78% for CTA and 0.80% for ASMF.

ASMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 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 CTA and ASMF

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