WTMF ranks 2nd and KMLM 8th of 14 funds in the Managed Futures Category.
KMLM vs WTMF
WTMF −0.24pt a year
0.90%0.66%
KMLM 9.5×the volume
338K35.5K
WTMF +1.2pt
+5.5%+6.7%
KMLM vs WTMF Performance
+30.5%+38.6%
- KMLM 0.90%
- WTMF 0.66%, better
- KMLM $596M
- WTMF $264M
- KMLM +20.7%, better
- WTMF +13.5%
- KMLM 4.25%
- WTMF 7.87%, better
- KMLM 8
- WTMF 27
- KMLM 338K sh, better
- WTMF 35.5K sh
- KMLM $30.70
- WTMF $39.66
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | KMLM | WTMF |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | D33 | A90Higher |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | C42 | A72Higher |
| Tradability | B65Higher | C51 |
| Holdings | D36 | |
| Durability | A75 | A80Higher |
Rank among Managed Futures funds
Same Category. KMLM and WTMF are both graded against the same 14 Managed Futures funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
KMLMC
WTMFA
In short
KMLM Trend following in its purest form: a rules-based index Mount Lucas has published since 1988, going long or short across commodities, currencies and global bonds. No stocks in the mix, by design.
WTMF A managed futures veteran. Trading since 2011, WTMF takes rules-based long and short positions across commodity, currency, equity and rate futures, aiming for returns with limited direct link to stocks or bonds.
Stated mandate
KMLM The Fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the price performance of the KFA MLM Index.
WTMF The Fund seeks positive total returns in rising or falling markets with limited direct correlation to broad equity or fixed-income returns. It uses a quantitative, rules-based approach with long and short futures positions across commodity, currency, equity, and interest-rate markets.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
KMLM vs WTMF Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
KMLM vs WTMF Cost
Overpaying KMLM vs WTMF
$4,144
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
KMLM 0.90%
$17,040
WTMF 0.66%
$12,896
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | KMLM | WTMF | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,593 | $1,180 | $413 |
| 20 | $6,015 | $4,504 | $1,511 |
| 30 | $17,040 | $12,896 | $4,144 |
- 0.90%KMLM
- 0.66%WTMF, cheaper
- Middle half of Managed Futures funds
- Median 0.85%
WTMF 3rd cheapest of 14 funds
KMLM 9th cheapest of 14 funds
KMLM vs WTMF Dividends
- KMLM 4.25%
- WTMF 7.87%, better
- KMLM $1.30
- WTMF $3.14
- KMLM $1.30
- WTMF $2.81
- KMLM Dec 22, 2025
- WTMF Oct 27, 2026
- KMLM Dec 23, 2025
- WTMF Oct 29, 2026
- KMLM Annual
- WTMF Annual
Distribution history
KMLM vs WTMF Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- KMLM
- WTMF
Risk facts
- Volatility
- KMLM 10.8%WTMF 6.4%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- KMLM −0.35WTMF 0.98, better
- Worst fall
- KMLM −27.6%WTMF −13.2%, better
- Market sensitivity
- KMLM −0.26WTMF 0.29
KMLM and WTMF in the news




Price vs Value
URNJ closed 1.57% below the value of its miners Friday


Popular comparisons
- 0.90% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.66% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.90% · 0.80%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.66% · 0.80%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.90% · 0.80%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.66% · 0.80%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.