MFUT vs. HFMF

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

MFUT (Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF) and HFMF (Unlimited HFMF Managed Futures ETF) are both Systematic Trend funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFUT charges 1.18%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for HFMF.

Performance

MFUT vs. HFMF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUT achieves a 15.99% return, which is significantly higher than HFMF's 4.98% return.

MFUT

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: -0.78%
• 6M: 9.64%
• YTD: 15.99%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HFMF

• 1D: 1.14%
• 1M: -0.77%
• 6M: -1.07%
• YTD: 4.98%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MFUT vs. HFMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	15.99%	10.11%
HFMF Unlimited HFMF Managed Futures ETF	4.98%	6.34%

Correlation

The correlation between MFUT and HFMF is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	0.52

Return for Risk

MFUT vs. HFMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUT

MFUT Risk / Return Rank: 64
MFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
MFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
MFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
MFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
MFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 56

HFMF

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. HFMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) and Unlimited HFMF Managed Futures ETF (HFMF). 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	HFMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.56	—	—

Drawdowns

MFUT vs. HFMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUT drawdown since its inception was -29.28%, which is greater than HFMF's maximum drawdown of -14.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUT and HFMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUT	HFMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.28%	-14.69%	-14.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.75%	-12.15%	+6.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.07%	-3.88%	-12.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.56%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MFUT	HFMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.35%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.29%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.57%	16.13%	-0.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.66%	16.13%	-2.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.66%	16.13%	-2.47%

MFUT vs. HFMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUT has a 1.18% expense ratio, which is higher than HFMF's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

MFUT vs. HFMF - Dividend Comparison

MFUT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HFMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
HFMF Unlimited HFMF Managed Futures ETF	2.83%	2.97%	0.00%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFUT and HFMF in my portfolio?

MFUT and HFMF have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MFUT or HFMF?

On fees, HFMF is cheaper at 0.97% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFUT or HFMF?

HFMF is cheaper with a 0.97% expense ratio, compared with 1.18% for MFUT.

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

HFMF has the higher dividend yield at 2.83%, compared with 0.00% for MFUT.

What is the main difference between MFUT and HFMF?

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and Unlimited. Their fees differ too: 1.18% for MFUT and 0.97% for HFMF.