IMF vs. GXDW

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IMF (Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and GXDW (Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF) are both Systematic Trend funds. IMF is actively managed, while GXDW is passively managed. Over the past year, IMF returned 18.87% vs -4.72% for GXDW. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IMF charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for GXDW.

Performance

IMF vs. GXDW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) and Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF (GXDW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMF achieves a 11.90% return, which is significantly higher than GXDW's 0.52% return.

IMF

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -0.22%
• 6M: 7.89%
• YTD: 11.90%
• 1Y: 18.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GXDW

• 1D: -3.29%
• 1M: -12.96%
• 6M: -6.91%
• YTD: 0.52%
• 1Y: -4.72%
• 3Y*: -4.61%
• 5Y*: -12.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

IMF vs. GXDW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF	11.90%	-8.17%
GXDW Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF	0.52%	1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between IMF and GXDW is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2025	0.29

Return for Risk

IMF vs. GXDW — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMF

IMF Risk / Return Rank: 76
IMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
IMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
IMF Omega Ratio Rank: 75
IMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
IMF Martin Ratio Rank: 82

GXDW

GXDW Risk / Return Rank: 8
GXDW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
GXDW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
GXDW Omega Ratio Rank: 8
GXDW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
GXDW Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

IMF vs. GXDW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) and Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF (GXDW). 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.

	IMF	GXDW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	-0.16	+1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	-0.02	+2.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.00	+0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	-0.19	+4.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.67	-0.42	+13.09

IMF vs. GXDW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is higher than the GXDW Sharpe Ratio of -0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMF and GXDW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IMF vs. GXDW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMF drawdown since its inception was -15.29%, smaller than the maximum GXDW drawdown of -67.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMF and GXDW.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMF	GXDW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.29%	-67.81%	+52.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.54%	-24.65%	+20.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.97%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-61.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.71%	-60.27%	+57.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.11%	-43.26%	+35.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.49%	11.26%	-9.77%

Volatility

IMF vs. GXDW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) is 2.83%, while Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF (GXDW) has a volatility of 11.81%. This indicates that IMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GXDW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMF	GXDW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.83%	11.81%	-8.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.21%	23.39%	-14.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.59%	29.48%	-18.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.34%	28.39%	-16.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.34%	29.93%	-17.59%

IMF vs. GXDW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMF has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than GXDW's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMF vs. GXDW - Dividend Comparison

IMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than GXDW's 1.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GXDW Global X Dorsey Wright Thematic ETF	1.49%	1.40%	1.08%	1.99%	1.48%	1.56%	0.48%	0.31%
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF	0.90%	1.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMF and GXDW in my portfolio?

IMF and GXDW have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IMF or GXDW?

GXDW has higher volatility (11.81%) compared to IMF (2.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMF dropped -15.29% vs GXDW's -67.81%.

Which ETF is better, IMF or GXDW?

On 1-year performance, IMF leads with 18.87% vs -4.72% for GXDW. On fees, GXDW is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, IMF has been the lower-risk option at 2.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IMF or GXDW?

Over the 1-year period, IMF has performed better with a 18.87% return vs -4.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMF or GXDW?

GXDW is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for IMF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMF or GXDW?

GXDW has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.90% for IMF.

What is the main difference between IMF and GXDW?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IMF and 0.50% for GXDW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs -0.16), 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.