IMF vs. LLII
IMF (Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and LLII (REX LLY Growth & Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Invesco, while LLII is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. IMF charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for LLII.
Performance
IMF vs. LLII - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMF achieves a 14.07% return, which is significantly higher than LLII's -4.28% return.
IMF
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.95%
- YTD
- 14.07%
- 6M
- 18.34%
- 1Y
- 20.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LLII
- 1D
- 1.47%
- 1M
- 9.79%
- YTD
- -4.28%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMF vs. LLII - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 14.07% | 5.95% |
LLII REX LLY Growth & Income ETF | -4.28% | 19.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMF and LLII is -0.04, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2025 | -0.04 |
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
IMF vs. LLII — Risk / Return Rank
IMF
LLII
IMF vs. LLII - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) and REX LLY Growth & Income ETF (LLII). 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.
| IMF | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.75 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.12 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IMF | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.99 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.71 | -0.38 |
Drawdowns
IMF vs. LLII - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMF drawdown since its inception was -15.10%, smaller than the maximum LLII drawdown of -23.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMF and LLII.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMF | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.10% | -23.96% | +8.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.59% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | -6.88% | +6.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.41% | -9.28% | +0.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.36% | — | — |
Volatility
IMF vs. LLII - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMF | LLII | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.08% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.91% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.45% | 36.42% | -25.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.48% | 36.42% | -23.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.48% | 36.42% | -23.94% |
IMF vs. LLII - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMF has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than LLII's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMF vs. LLII - Dividend Comparison
IMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, less than LLII's 25.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF | 0.89% | 1.01% |
LLII REX LLY Growth & Income ETF | 25.95% | 5.13% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMF and LLII have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IMF is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IMF is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for LLII.
LLII has the higher dividend yield at 25.95%, compared with 0.89% for IMF.
IMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while LLII is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IMF and 0.99% for LLII.
Find the right allocation for IMF and LLII
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