MFUT vs. AHLT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MFUT (Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF) and AHLT (American Beacon AHL Trend ETF) are both Systematic Trend funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MFUT returned 28.61% vs 34.47% for AHLT. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFUT charges 1.18%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for AHLT.

Performance

MFUT vs. AHLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) and American Beacon AHL Trend ETF (AHLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUT achieves a 13.81% return, which is significantly higher than AHLT's 9.50% return.

MFUT

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -4.70%
• YTD: 13.81%
• 6M: 12.83%
• 1Y: 28.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AHLT

• 1D: -1.85%
• 1M: -2.14%
• YTD: 9.50%
• 6M: 8.40%
• 1Y: 34.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MFUT vs. AHLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	13.81%	-1.83%	-16.64%
AHLT American Beacon AHL Trend ETF	9.50%	13.73%	-10.44%

Correlation

The correlation between MFUT and AHLT is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2024	0.52

The correlation between MFUT and AHLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MFUT vs. AHLT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUT

MFUT Risk / Return Rank: 61
MFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
MFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
MFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
MFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 57

AHLT

AHLT Risk / Return Rank: 66
AHLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
AHLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
AHLT Omega Ratio Rank: 63
AHLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
AHLT Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

MFUT vs. AHLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) and American Beacon AHL Trend ETF (AHLT). 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.

	MFUT	AHLT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	1.97	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	2.51	-0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.36	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	4.19	-1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.35	11.05	-1.70

MFUT vs. AHLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFUT Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the AHLT Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFUT and AHLT, 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

MFUT vs. AHLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUT drawdown since its inception was -29.28%, which is greater than AHLT's maximum drawdown of -20.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUT and AHLT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUT	AHLT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.28%	-20.18%	-9.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.23%	-8.26%	-0.97%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.52%	-3.38%	-4.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.28%	-9.26%	-7.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.07%	3.13%	-0.06%

Volatility

MFUT vs. AHLT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) is 4.28%, while American Beacon AHL Trend ETF (AHLT) has a volatility of 4.60%. This indicates that MFUT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AHLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MFUT	AHLT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.28%	4.60%	-0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.11%	12.68%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.05%	17.53%	-2.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.49%	17.38%	-3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.49%	17.38%	-3.89%

MFUT vs. AHLT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUT has a 1.18% expense ratio, which is higher than AHLT's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MFUT vs. AHLT - Dividend Comparison

MFUT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AHLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
AHLT American Beacon AHL Trend ETF	1.55%	1.70%	0.00%	3.72%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.33%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFUT and AHLT in my portfolio?

MFUT and AHLT have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MFUT or AHLT?

AHLT has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to MFUT (4.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFUT dropped -29.28% vs AHLT's -20.18%.

Which ETF is better, MFUT or AHLT?

On 1-year performance, AHLT leads with 34.47% vs 28.61% for MFUT. On fees, AHLT is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MFUT has been the lower-risk option at 4.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MFUT or AHLT?

Over the 1-year period, AHLT has performed better with a 34.47% return vs 28.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFUT or AHLT?

AHLT is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.18% for MFUT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MFUT or AHLT?

AHLT has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.00% for MFUT.

What is the main difference between MFUT and AHLT?

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 1.18% for MFUT and 0.95% for AHLT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AHLT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.91), 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.