Screener
MATE vs IMF
Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF vs Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF
Key differences
- IMF costs 0.32% less per year.
- IMF is significantly larger than MATE — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- MATE follows a tactical allocation strategy; IMF uses managed futures.
Side-by-side comparison
| MATE | IMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.97% | 0.65% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $37M | $301M |
| Since | 2025 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.89% |
| Asset class | alternative | alternative |
| Region | emerging markets | — |
| Strategy | tactical allocation | managed futures |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +19.7% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 10.46% |
| Max drawdown | -13.24% | -15.10% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to MATE and IMF
Explore further