Screener
MATE vs ISMF
Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF vs iShares Managed Futures Active ETF
Key differences
- ISMF costs 0.17% less per year.
- MATE covers emerging markets markets; ISMF covers global.
- MATE follows a tactical allocation strategy; ISMF uses managed futures.
Side-by-side comparison
| MATE | ISMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.97% | 0.80% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $37M | $57M |
| Since | 2025 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | — | 2.50% |
| Asset class | alternative | alternative |
| Region | emerging markets | global |
| Strategy | tactical allocation | managed futures |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +22.3% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 7.87% |
| Max drawdown | -13.24% | -4.23% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to MATE and ISMF
Explore further