CTA vs. RWJ

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CTA (Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CTA is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Simplify, while RWJ is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index. CTA is actively managed, while RWJ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CTA returned 10.94%/yr vs 16.27%/yr for RWJ. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. CTA charges 0.78%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWJ.

Performance

CTA vs. RWJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CTA achieves a 9.63% return, which is significantly lower than RWJ's 16.99% return.

CTA

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: -4.51%
• YTD: 9.63%
• 6M: 12.55%
• 1Y: 10.03%
• 3Y*: 10.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RWJ

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: 1.37%
• YTD: 16.99%
• 6M: 17.05%
• 1Y: 36.58%
• 3Y*: 16.27%
• 5Y*: 7.78%
• 10Y*: 13.10%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CTA vs. RWJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	9.63%	0.88%	24.15%	-2.23%	9.55%
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	16.99%	7.75%	11.81%	16.21%	-6.83%

Correlation

The correlation between CTA and RWJ is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2022	-0.12

CTA vs. RWJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CTA	RWJ
Basic Materials	-	5.2%
Communication Services	-	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	23.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.9%
Energy	-	7.4%
Healthcare	-	11.2%
Industrials	-	16.2%
Real Estate	-	4.0%
Technology	-	9.9%
Utilities	-	0.9%
Financial Services	-49.1%	11.0%

Return for Risk

CTA vs. RWJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CTA

CTA Risk / Return Rank: 19
CTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
CTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
CTA Omega Ratio Rank: 18
CTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CTA Martin Ratio Rank: 21

RWJ

RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 65
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 59
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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. RWJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ). 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.

	CTA	RWJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	1.90	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.78	2.74	-1.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.33	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.92	3.25	-2.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.32	10.40	-8.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CTA vs. RWJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTA Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the RWJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTA and RWJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CTA	RWJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	1.90	-1.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.33	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.46	+0.11

Drawdowns

CTA vs. RWJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTA drawdown since its inception was -18.07%, smaller than the maximum RWJ drawdown of -55.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTA and RWJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CTA	RWJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.07%	-55.97%	+37.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.00%	-11.31%	+0.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.23%	-29.29%	+18.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.05%	-0.33%	-9.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.69%	-9.23%	+3.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	3.53%	+0.80%

Volatility

CTA vs. RWJ - Volatility Comparison

Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) has a higher volatility of 6.73% compared to Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) at 4.80%. This indicates that CTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CTA	RWJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.73%	4.80%	+1.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.43%	12.38%	+5.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.21%	19.43%	+0.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.59%	23.72%	-7.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.59%	26.15%	-9.56%

CTA vs. RWJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CTA has a 0.78% expense ratio, which is higher than RWJ's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

CTA vs. RWJ - Dividend Comparison

CTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.97%, more than RWJ's 1.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	4.97%	3.19%	4.80%	7.78%	6.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	1.00%	1.11%	1.15%	1.34%	1.02%	0.61%	0.89%	1.22%	1.44%	1.11%	0.60%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CTA and RWJ in my portfolio?

CTA and RWJ have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CTA or RWJ?

CTA has higher volatility (6.73%) compared to RWJ (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTA dropped -18.07% vs RWJ's -55.97%.

Which ETF is better, CTA or RWJ?

On 3-year performance, RWJ leads with 16.27% vs 10.94% for CTA. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CTA or RWJ?

Over the 3-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 16.27% return vs 10.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CTA or RWJ?

RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for CTA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CTA or RWJ?

CTA has the higher dividend yield at 4.97%, compared with 1.00% for RWJ.

What is the main difference between CTA and RWJ?

CTA is categorized as Systematic Trend, while RWJ is Small Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.78% for CTA and 0.39% for RWJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 0.50), 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.