RWJ vs. CTA

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

RWJ (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF) and CTA (Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWJ is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index, while CTA is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Simplify. RWJ is passively managed, while CTA is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RWJ returned 16.58%/yr vs 9.71%/yr for CTA. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. RWJ charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for CTA.

Performance

RWJ vs. CTA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWJ achieves a 24.54% return, which is significantly higher than CTA's 4.59% return.

RWJ

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 3.74%
• 6M: 15.25%
• YTD: 24.54%
• 1Y: 37.36%
• 3Y*: 16.58%
• 5Y*: 10.67%
• 10Y*: 13.23%
• ALL TIME*: 12.50%

CTA

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 2.38%
• 6M: 2.75%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 1Y: 3.52%
• 3Y*: 9.71%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.94%

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

RWJ vs. CTA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	24.54%	7.75%	11.81%	16.21%	-5.63%
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	4.59%	0.88%	24.15%	-2.23%	9.01%

Correlation

The correlation between RWJ and CTA is -0.08, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2022	-0.13

Return for Risk

RWJ vs. CTA — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWJ

RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 81
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 78

CTA

CTA Risk / Return Rank: 13
CTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
CTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Omega Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
CTA Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

RWJ vs. CTA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) 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.

	RWJ	CTA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.98	0.17	+1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	0.37	+2.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.05	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.32	0.17	+3.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.72	0.49	+10.23

RWJ vs. CTA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is higher than the CTA Sharpe Ratio of 0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWJ 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

RWJ vs. CTA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWJ drawdown since its inception was -55.97%, which is greater than CTA's maximum drawdown of -20.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWJ and CTA.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWJ	CTA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.97%	-20.44%	-35.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.31%	-20.44%	+9.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.29%	-20.44%	-8.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.29%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-14.18%	+12.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.18%	-5.99%	-3.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	7.21%	-3.72%

Volatility

RWJ vs. CTA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) is 4.21%, while Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF (CTA) has a volatility of 5.46%. This indicates that RWJ 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

	RWJ	CTA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.21%	5.46%	-1.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.50%	18.01%	-5.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.96%	20.77%	-1.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.52%	16.66%	+6.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.06%	16.66%	+9.40%

RWJ vs. CTA - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWJ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CTA's 0.78% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWJ vs. CTA - Dividend Comparison

RWJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than CTA's 4.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTA Simplify Managed Futures Strategy ETF	4.80%	3.19%	4.80%	7.78%	6.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWJ Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF	1.01%	1.11%	1.15%	1.34%	1.02%	0.61%	0.89%	1.22%	1.44%	1.11%	0.60%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWJ and CTA in my portfolio?

RWJ and CTA have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWJ or CTA?

CTA has higher volatility (5.46%) compared to RWJ (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWJ dropped -55.97% vs CTA's -20.44%.

Which ETF is better, RWJ or CTA?

On 3-year performance, RWJ leads with 16.58% vs 9.71% for CTA. On fees, RWJ is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWJ or CTA?

Over the 3-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 16.58% return vs 9.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWJ or CTA?

RWJ is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for CTA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWJ or CTA?

CTA has the higher dividend yield at 4.80%, compared with 1.01% for RWJ.

What is the main difference between RWJ and CTA?

RWJ is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while CTA is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWJ and 0.78% for CTA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 0.17), 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.