RGBM.TO vs. CTA

Last updated Jul 31, 2026

RGBM.TO (Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF) and CTA (Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RGBM.TO is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Return Stacked, while CTA is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Simplify. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RGBM.TO returned 24.28% vs 3.40% for CTA. Their 0.05 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RGBM.TO charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for CTA.

Performance

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) and Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

RGBM.TO is traded in CAD, while CTA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CTA values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RGBM.TO achieves a 17.43% return, which is significantly higher than CTA's 5.08% return.

RGBM.TO

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -0.31%
• 6M: 17.05%
• YTD: 17.43%
• 1Y: 24.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.66%

CTA

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: 3.43%
• 6M: -0.47%
• YTD: 5.08%
• 1Y: 3.40%
• 3Y*: 10.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.67%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	CA$16.65M	CA$17.98M	CA$20.66M
RGBM.TO Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF	CA$8.61K	CA$14.11K	CA$15.20K

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RGBM.TO Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF	17.43%	-2.43%
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.08%	-7.37%

Correlation

The correlation between RGBM.TO and CTA is 0.00, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	0.05

Return for Risk

RGBM.TO vs. CTA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RGBM.TO

RGBM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 88
RGBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
RGBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
RGBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 90
RGBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
RGBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 79

CTA

CTA Risk / Return Rank: 13
CTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Omega Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
CTA Martin Ratio Rank: 12

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) and Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA). 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.

	RGBM.TO	CTA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	0.15	+2.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	0.35	+2.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.05	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	0.20	+3.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.89	0.49	+9.40

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RGBM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is higher than the CTA Sharpe Ratio of 0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RGBM.TO and CTA, 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

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RGBM.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.89%, smaller than the maximum CTA drawdown of -19.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGBM.TO and CTA.

Drawdown Indicators

	RGBM.TO	CTA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.89%	-19.61%	+3.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-17.10%	+10.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.98%	-13.47%	+11.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.52%	-7.06%	+2.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	6.96%	-4.50%

Volatility

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF (RGBM.TO) is 3.68%, while Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) has a volatility of 8.52%. This indicates that RGBM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RGBM.TO	CTA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.68%	8.52%	-4.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.24%	19.60%	-12.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.68%	22.11%	-11.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.75%	18.26%	-5.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.75%	18.26%	-5.51%

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Expense Ratio Comparison

RGBM.TO has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CTA's 0.78% expense ratio.

Dividends

RGBM.TO vs. CTA - Dividend Comparison

RGBM.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.40%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	5.40%	3.19%	4.80%	7.78%	6.58%
RGBM.TO Return Stacked Global Balanced & Macro ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RGBM.TO and CTA in my portfolio?

RGBM.TO and CTA have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RGBM.TO or CTA?

On fees, CTA is cheaper at 0.78% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RGBM.TO or CTA?

CTA is cheaper with a 0.78% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for RGBM.TO.

What is the main difference between RGBM.TO and CTA?

RGBM.TO is categorized as Multistrategy, while CTA is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Return Stacked and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RGBM.TO and 0.78% for CTA.