PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ICF vs. FFUT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ICF vs. FFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Cohen & Steers REIT ETF (ICF) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICF achieves a 13.03% return, which is significantly higher than FFUT's 9.80% return.


ICF

1D
-0.37%
1M
-1.41%
YTD
13.03%
6M
14.35%
1Y
11.84%
3Y*
9.48%
5Y*
3.19%
10Y*
5.47%

FFUT

1D
-0.37%
1M
-2.09%
YTD
9.80%
6M
10.73%
1Y
19.53%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ICF vs. FFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
ICF
iShares Cohen & Steers REIT ETF
13.03%-1.03%
FFUT
Fidelity Managed Futures ETF
9.80%8.58%

Correlation

The correlation between ICF and FFUT is -0.12, 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

-0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025

-0.11

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

ICF vs. FFUT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICF
ICF Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
ICF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICF Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
ICF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICF Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

FFUT
FFUT Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
FFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
FFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

ICF vs. FFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Cohen & Steers REIT ETF (ICF) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). 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.


ICFFFUTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.88

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.33

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.44

5.14

-3.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.06

15.50

-11.44

ICF vs. FFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICF Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the FFUT Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICF and FFUT, 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...

Drawdowns

ICF vs. FFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICF drawdown since its inception was -76.74%, which is greater than FFUT's maximum drawdown of -3.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICF and FFUT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ICFFFUTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.74%

-3.73%

-73.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.20%

-3.73%

-4.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.74%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.34%

-3.48%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.15%

-0.93%

-13.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.90%

1.24%

+1.66%

Volatility

ICF vs. FFUT - Volatility Comparison

iShares Cohen & Steers REIT ETF (ICF) has a higher volatility of 4.90% compared to Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT) at 2.96%. This indicates that ICF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ICFFFUTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.90%

2.96%

+1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.55%

8.94%

+1.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.12%

11.20%

+2.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.97%

11.04%

+7.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.61%

11.04%

+9.57%

ICF vs. FFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICF has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than FFUT's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

ICF vs. FFUT - Dividend Comparison

ICF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%, more than FFUT's 1.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FFUT
Fidelity Managed Futures ETF
1.90%2.09%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ICF
iShares Cohen & Steers REIT ETF
2.48%2.88%2.66%2.76%2.64%1.82%2.38%2.55%3.20%3.10%4.21%3.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


ICF and FFUT have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ICF has higher volatility (4.90%) compared to FFUT (2.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICF dropped -76.74% vs FFUT's -3.73%.

On 1-year performance, FFUT leads with 19.53% vs 11.84% for ICF. On fees, ICF is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, FFUT has been the lower-risk option at 2.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FFUT has performed better with a 19.53% return vs 11.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ICF is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FFUT.

ICF has the higher dividend yield at 2.48%, compared with 1.90% for FFUT.

ICF is categorized as REIT, while FFUT is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for ICF and 0.80% for FFUT.

FFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 0.84), 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 ICF and FFUT

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