Back to GetFilings.com

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003

Commission File Number: 0-16515

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

233 South Wacker Drive
Suite 2300
Chicago, IL 60606
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

(312) 460-4000
(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Units of Limited Partnership Interest

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. |X| Yes |_| No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. |X|

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). |_| Yes |X| No

The Partnership's units of limited partnership interest are not traded on any market and, accordingly, do not have an aggregate market value. The net asset value of the units held by non-affiliated investors as of June 30, 2003 was $31,918,778.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Incorporated by Reference in Part IV, Item 14 is Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 33-86894 of the Partnership on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, filed on June 7, 1996.

Incorporated by Reference in Part IV, Item 14 is Post-Effective Amendment No. 3 to Registration Statement No. 33-86894 of the Partnership on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, filed on July 31, 1997.

Incorporated by Reference in Part IV, Item 14 is Post-Effective Amendment No. 4 to Registration Statement No. 33-86894 of the Partnership on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, filed on April 21, 1998.

Incorporated by Reference in Part IV, Item 14 is Post-Effective Amendment No. 5 to Registration Statement No. 33-86894 of the Partnership on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, filed on March 24, 1999.

Incorporated by Reference in Part IV, Item 14 is Post-Effective Amendment No. 6 to Registration Statement No. 33-86894 of the Partnership on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933, filed on March 2, 2000.

Part I

Item 1. Business

(a) General Development of Business; Narrative Description of Business

IDS Managed Futures, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a limited partnership organized on December 16, 1986 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act. The Partnership was formed to speculatively trade commodity interests, including futures contracts, forward contracts, physical commodities, and related options thereon pursuant to the trading instructions of independent trading advisors. The General Partners of the partnership are CIS Investments, Inc. (“CISI”) and IDS Futures Corporation (“IDS Futures”) (collectively, the “General Partners”). The General Partners are registered commodity pool operators under the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (the “CE Act”) and are responsible for administering the business and affairs of the Partnership exclusive of trading decisions. CISI is an affiliate of Cargill Investor Services, Inc. (“CIS” or the “Clearing Broker”), the clearing broker for the Partnership. IDS Futures is an affiliate of American Express Financial Advisors Inc. (“AEFA”), formerly IDS Financial Services Inc., which acts as the Partnership’s introducing broker and selling agent. Trading decisions for the Partnership for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 were made by two independent commodity trading advisors, John W. Henry & Company, Inc. (“JWH”) and Sunrise Capital Partners, LLC (“Sunrise”).

CIS is a “Futures Commission Merchant,” the General Partners are “Commodity Pool Operators,” AEFA is an “Introducing Broker” and the trading advisors to the Partnership are “Commodity Trading Advisors” as those terms are used in the CE Act. As such, they are registered with and subject to regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) and the National Futures Association (“NFA”). AEFA and CIS Securities, Inc., an affiliate of CIS and CISI, are also registered as broker-dealers with the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

Units of limited partnership interest (“units”) were offered initially by AEFA commencing March 27, 1987 and concluding June 16, 1987. Subsequent offerings commenced March 29, 1993, January 31, 1994, June 26, 1995, and August 26, 1997. Units are no longer being offered. The total amount of the initial offering was $7,500,000 and the total amount of the combined reopenings was $80,000,000. After the initial purchase price of $250 per unit, investors purchase units at the then current net asset value (“NAV”) per unit on the last business day of the month; investors affiliated with the selling agent of the Partnership were not required to pay selling commissions, and the offering had varied selling commission rates depending on the total dollar amount of the investment. Therefore, the total number of units authorized for the Partnership is not determinable and therefore is not disclosed in the financial statements.

At the close of business on February 28, 1995 each unit was divided into three units (a “3 for 1 split”), each of which had a NAV per unit equal to the NAV per unit on February 28, 1995 divided by three. Accordingly, the total number of units outstanding tripled as of that date.

CIS Financial Services, Inc. (“CISFS”), an affiliate of CIS and CISI, acts as the Partnership’s forward contract broker and in that capacity arranges for the Partnership to contract directly for forward transactions in foreign currencies. CISFS is a direct participant in the interbank market for foreign currencies. The Partnership acts as a principal in each transaction entered into with a bank, and CISFS acts only as the Partnership’s agent in brokering these transactions.

Under the terms of the Limited Partnership Agreement, the General Partners may not select Partnership transactions involving the purchase or sale of any commodity interests, but must select one or more advisors to direct the Partnership’s trading with respect thereto. Initially, the General Partners chose and caused the Partnership to enter into Advisory Contracts with each of JWH and Sabre Fund Management Limited (“Sabre”). Commencing on June 16, 1987, after the initial conclusion of the offering period with respect to the Partnership’s units, JWH and Sabre began to provide commodity trading instructions to CIS on behalf of the Partnership. The General Partners felt it appropriate to make a change in trading advisor systems; 70 percent of the assets formerly managed by JWH pursuant to its Original Investment Program were allocated to another program operated by JWH, the Financial and Metals Portfolio, as of February 28, 1989. The remaining assets in JWH’s Original Investment Program were closed due to disappointing performance as of October 13, 1989. This money was reallocated to Sabre in early 1990. In February 1991, the General Partners felt it prudent to realign the assets of the Partnership so that JWH and Sabre were each allocated 50% of the trading assets. On July 2, 1997 the General Partners entered into an agreement to add Welton Investment Corporation (“Welton”) as an additional independent commodity trading advisor for the Partnership and, effective July 8, 1997 the assets of the Partnership were re-allocated among the three independent trading advisors. In accordance with the terms of the Advisory Contract between the Partnership and Sabre, the General Partners elected not to renew the Advisory Contract for Sabre and it expired on December 31, 1997. From January 1, 1998 through November 30, 2001, all of the assets of the Partnership were managed by JWH and Welton. In December 2001, Sunrise replaced Welton as a commodity trading advisor to the Partnership. The Partnership invested a portion of its assets with Sunrise through its investment in IDS Managed Fund LLC, a Delaware limited liability company of which the Partnership and IDS Managed Futures II, L.P. are the only limited partners and for which Sunrise acts as the commodity trading advisor. Collectively, JWH and Sunrise are herein referred to as the “Advisors”.

The General Partners are responsible for the preparation of monthly and annual reports to the Limited Partners; filing reports required by the CFTC, the NFA, the SEC and any other Federal or state agencies having jurisdiction over the Partnership’s operations; calculation of the NAV (meaning the total assets less total liabilities of the Partnership) and directing payment of the management and incentive fees payable to the Advisors under the Advisory Contracts.

The General Partners provide suitable facilities and procedures for handling redemptions, transfers, distributions of profits (if any) and, if necessary, the orderly liquidation of the Partnership’s assets. Although CIS, an affiliate of CISI (one of the General Partners) acts as the Partnership’s clearing broker, the General Partners are responsible for selecting another clearing broker in the event CIS is unable or unwilling to continue in that capacity. The General Partners are further authorized, on behalf of the Partnership (i) to enter into a brokerage clearing agreement and related customer agreements with their affiliates, CIS and AEFA, pursuant to which those firms render clearing and introducing brokerage services to the Partnership; (ii) to cause the Partnership to pay brokerage commissions at the rates provided for in the brokerage agreement (until August 31, 1995 this rate was $50 per round turn trade to CIS which in turn reallocated $30 per round turn trade to AEFA, effective September 1, 1995, which was the first business day of the month following the initial closing of the new offering, the round turn brokerage commission rate was decreased from $50 to $35 per round turn trade to CIS which in turn reallocates $20 per round turn trade to AEFA) and NFA, exchange, clearing, delivery, insurance, storage, service and other fees and charges including surcharges on foreign exchanges with higher incremental costs incidental to the Partnership’s trading; and (iii) to receive an annual administrative fee equal, in the case of IDS Futures, to 1.45% of the Partnership’s NAV on the first business day of each fiscal year and, in the case of CISI, to 0.3% of the Partnership’s NAV on the first business day of each fiscal year until December 31, 1992. Commencing January 1, 1993, the annual administrative fee payable to IDS Futures was reduced to 1.125% and the annual administrative fee payable to CISI was reduced to 0.25%. Although no increase to brokerage commissions or administrative fees is anticipated, such fees as allowed in the Prospectus may be increased at rates equivalent to increases in the Consumer Price Index or other comparable measure of inflation.

The Advisory Contract between the Partnership and JWH provides that JWH shall have sole discretion in and responsibility for the selection of the Partnership’s commodity transactions with respect to that portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to it. The Advisory Contract with JWH was amended on April 30, 1996 (but made effective back to the date of January 31, 1996) to extend the term of the Advisory Contract through December 31, 1996 with the automatic renewal for three additional twelve-month terms (beginning January 1 and ending December 31 of each year) through December 1999, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the termination provisions contained therein. On December 31, 1999, the Advisory Contract was further amended to extend the agreement between the parties until December 31, 2002 unless earlier terminated in accordance with the termination provisions contained therein. The Advisory Contract with Welton commenced on July 2, 1997 and continued until December 31, 1998, with automatic renewal for three additional twelve-month terms (beginning January 1 and ending December 31 of each year) through December 2001, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the termination provisions contained therein. The renewal right is applicable irrespective of any change in trading advisors of the Partnership or any reallocation of Partnership assets among the trading advisors or to other trading advisors.

The Advisory Contracts with JWH shall terminate automatically in the event that the Partnership is terminated in accordance with the Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement. The Advisory Contract may be terminated by the Partnership with respect to JWH upon written notice to JWH in the event that (i) the Partnership assets allocated to JWH has trading losses in excess of 30% of the assets originally allocated to JWH; (ii) JWH is unable, to any material extent, to use its agreed upon Trading Approach; (iii) JWH’s registration is revoked or not renewed; (iv) there is unauthorized assignment of the Advisory Contract by JWH; (v) JWH dissolves, merges, consolidates with another entity, sells a substantial portion of its assets, changes control, become bankrupt or insolvent or has a change in executive officer; or (vi) the General Partners determine in good faith that such termination is necessary for the protection of the Partnership.

JWH may terminate the Advisory Contract at any time upon written notice to the Partnership in the event (i) that its continued trading on behalf of the Partnership would require JWH to become registered as an investment advisor under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940; (ii) that assets in excess of 50% of the initially allocated assets are reallocated from JWH; (iii) that the registration of either General Partner is revoked, suspended, terminated or not renewed; (iv) that the General Partners elect to have JWH use a trading approach which is different from that initially used; (v) that the General Partners override a trading instruction or impose additional trading limitations; (vi) that there is an unauthorized assignment of the Advisory Contract by the General Partners; or (vii) other good cause is shown to which the written consent of the General Partners is also obtained. JWH may also terminate the Advisory Contract on 60 days written notice to the General Partners during any renewal term.

Other trading advisors who are not affiliated with the Partnership may utilize trading methods that are similar in some respects to those methods used by the Partnership’s Advisors. These other trading advisors could also be competing with the Partnership for the same or similar trades as requested by the Partnership’s Advisors.

The Partnership initially paid JWH a monthly management fee of 1/4 of 1% of the Partnership’s NAV under management as of the end of the month, whether or not the Partnership was profitable, and a quarterly incentive fee of 18% of new trading profits achieved on the NAV of the Partnership’s assets allocated to such Advisor’s management until June 30, 1992. Effective July 1, 1992, the Partnership paid JWH 1/3 of 1% of the month-end NAV of the Partnership and a quarterly incentive fee of 15% of the Partnership’s new trading profits, if any, attributable to its management. Effective October 1, 2000, the Partnership began paying JWH 1/6 of 1% of the month-end NAV of the Partnership’s assets managed by JWH and a quarterly incentive fee of 20% of the Partnership’s new trading profits, if any, attributable to its management. Pursuant to an agreement between the Partnership and Welton, the Partnership paid Welton a monthly management fee of 1/4 of 1% of the month-end NAV of the Partnership’s assets under its management and a quarterly incentive fee of 18% of new trading profits achieved on the NAV of the Partnership’s assets allocated to its management. Effective October 1, 2000, the Partnership began paying Welton 1/6 of 1% of the month-end NAV of the Partnership’s assets managed by Welton and a quarterly incentive fee of 20% of the Partnership’s new trading profits, if any, attributable to its management. The incentive fee is paid to an Advisor only when the cumulative trading profits for assets allocated to that Advisor at the end of a quarter exceed the highest previous cumulative trading profits at the end of a quarter for which an incentive fee was paid to the Advisor. The calculation and payment of incentive fees is not affected by the performance of the other Advisors.

The Limited Partnership Agreement provides that (i) funds will be invested only in futures contracts which are traded in sufficient volume to permit, in the opinion of each Advisor, ease of taking and liquidating positions; (ii) no Advisor will establish futures positions in a commodity interest such that the margin required for those positions, when added to that required for existing positions for the same commodity interest, would exceed 15% of the Partnership’s assets allocated to the Advisor; (iii) it is expected that 20% to 60% of the Net Assets of the Partnership will normally be committed to initial margin, however, no Advisor may commit more than 66 2/3% of the assets under its management to initial margin; (iv) the Partnership will not generally enter into an open position for a particular commodity interest during a delivery month; (v) the Partnership may not trade in securities or options on securities, commodity futures contracts, or physical commodities unless such options have been approved for trading on a designated contract market by the CFTC; the Partnership may trade in foreign options if permitted under the CE Act and CFTC regulations; the Partnership may trade in futures contracts, futures contracts on foreign currencies through foreign and domestic commodity exchanges and forward contracts on foreign currencies; (vi) the Partnership may not engage in pyramiding, but may employ spreads or straddles; (vii) the Partnership’s assets will not be commingled with the assets of any other person; (viii) no Advisor will be permitted to engage in churning the assets of the Partnership; and (ix) no rebates or give-ups may be paid to or received by the General Partners. The Partnership will not generally utilize borrowing except for short-term borrowing when the Partnership takes delivery of a physical commodity. Material changes in these trading policies must be approved by a vote of a majority of the outstanding units.

The Partnership currently has no salaried employees and all administrative services performed for the Partnership are performed by the General Partners. The General Partners have no employees other than their officers and directors, all of whom are employees of the affiliated companies of the General Partners. For these administrative services, the General Partners received an annual fee, as described above, equal to 1.75% of the NAV on the first day of the Partnership’s fiscal year (paid on a pro rata basis for the first year of the Partnership’s trading) until December 31, 1992. Commencing January 1, 1993, the annual administrative fee for the General Partners was reduced to 1.375% of the NAV on the first day of the Partnership’s fiscal year.

(b) Financial Information about Segments

The Partnership’s business constitutes only one segment for financial reporting purposes; it is a limited partnership whose purpose is to trade, buy, sell, spread or otherwise acquire, hold or dispose of commodity interests including futures contracts, forward contracts, physical commodities and related options thereon. The Partnership does not engage in the production or sale of any goods or services. The objective of the Partnership business is appreciation of its assets through speculative trading in such commodity interests. Financial information about the Partnership’s business, as of December 31, 2003, is set forth under Items 6 and 7 herein.

(c) Financial Information about Geographic Areas

Although the Partnership trades in the global futures and forward markets, it does not have operations outside of the United States.

(d) Available Information

The Partnership is not an accelerated filer; however, it is providing the following information in accordance with Item 101(e) of Regulation S-K.

The Partnership does not have an Internet website; therefore, annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to the foregoing reports are not available to Limited Partners in this manner. The Partnership provides paper copies of such reports and amendments free of charge.

Item 2. Properties

The Partnership does not utilize any physical properties in the conduct of its business. The General Partners use the offices of CIS and AEFA, at no additional charge to the Partnership, to perform their administration functions, and the Partnership uses the offices of CIS, again at no additional charge to the Partnership, as its principal administrative offices.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

None

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

None

Part II

Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Units and Related Security Holder Matters

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following Selected Financial Data is presented for the years ended December 31, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 and is derived from the financial statements for such fiscal years, which have been audited by KPMG, LLP.

Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

(a) Capital Resources

The Partnership’s capital resources fluctuate based upon the redemption of units and the gains and losses of the Partnership’s trading activities. For the fiscal year-ended December 31, 2003, Limited Partners redeemed a total of 12,083.00 units for $5,162,103. For the fiscal year-ended December 31, 2002, Limited Partners redeemed a total of 15,583.53 units for $4,920,177.

The Partnership’s involvement in the futures and forward markets exposes the Partnership to both market risk – the risk arising from changes in the market value of the futures and forward contracts held by the Partnership – and credit risk – the risk that another party to a contract will fail to perform its obligations according to the terms of the contract. The Partnership is exposed to a market risk equal to the value of the futures and forward contracts purchased and theoretically unlimited risk of loss on contracts sold short. The Advisors monitor the Partnership’s trading activities and attempt to control the Partnership’s exposure to market risk by, among other things, refining its trading strategies, adjusting position sizes of the Partnership’s futures and forward contacts and re-allocating Partnership assets to different market sectors. The Partnership’s primary exposure to credit risk is its exposure to the non-performance of the Forwards Currency Broker. The Forwards Currency Broker generally enters into forward contracts with large, well-capitalized institutions and then enters into a back-to-back contract with the Partnership. The Partnership also may trade on exchanges that do not have associated clearing houses whose credit supports the obligations of its members and operate as principals markets, in which case the Partnership will be exposed to the credit risk of the other party to such trades.

The Partnership’s trading activities involve varying degrees of off-balance sheet risk whereby changes in the market values of the futures and forward contracts underlying the financial instruments or the Partnership’s satisfaction of the obligations may exceed the amount recognized in the statement of financial condition of the Partnership.

The Partnership borrows only to a limited extent and only on a strictly short-term basis in order to finance losses on non-U.S. dollar denominated trading positions pending the conversion of the Partnership’s dollar deposits. These borrowings are at a prevailing short-term rate in the relevant currency. They have been immaterial to the Partnership’s operation to date and are expected to continue to be so.

During the fiscal year-ended December 31, 2003, the Partnership had no credit exposure to a counterparty which is a foreign commodities exchange which was material.

(b) Liquidity

On December 31, 2003, the Partnership had unrealized gain on open contracts of $1,253,021 and cash on deposit of $21,891,857. The total balance of the Partnership’s account at CIS was $23,144,878. These figures compare to unrealized gain on open contracts of $2,028,869, cash on deposit of $19,456,264 and a total balance of the Partnership’s account at CIS of $21,485,133 as of December 31, 2002.

The Partnership’s net assets are held in brokerage accounts with CIS and CISFS. Except in very unusual circumstances, the Partnership should be able to close out any or all of its open trading positions and liquidate any or all of its securities holdings quickly and at market prices. This should permit the Advisor to limit losses as well as reduce market exposure on short notice should its programs indicate reducing market exposure.

The Partnership earned interest on 100% of the Partnership’s average monthly cash balance at a rate equal to 90% of the average yield on the 91-day U.S. Treasury bills issued during that month. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, CIS had paid or accrued to pay interest of $204,186 to the Partnership. Similarly, for the calendar year-ended December 31, 2002, CIS had paid or accrued to pay interest of $256,021 to the Partnership.

Most United States commodity exchanges limit the amount of fluctuation in commodity futures contract prices during a single trading day by regulations. These regulations specify what are referred to as “daily price fluctuation limits” or “daily limits”. The daily limits establish the maximum amount the price of a futures contract may vary either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price at the end of a trading session. Once the daily limit has been reached in a particular commodity, no trades may be made at a price beyond the limit. Positions in the commodity could then be taken or liquidated only if traders are willing to effect trades at or within the limit during the period for trading on such day. Because the “daily limit” rule only governs price movement for a particular trading day, it does not limit losses. In the past, futures prices have moved the daily limit for numerous consecutive trading days and thereby prevented prompt liquidation of futures positions on one side of the market, subjecting commodity futures traders holding such positions to substantial losses for those days.

It is also possible for an exchange or the CFTC to suspend trading in a particular contract, order immediate settlement of a particular contract, or direct that trading in a particular contract be for liquidation only.

(c) Results of Operations

The Partnership’s success depends on the Advisors’ ability to recognize and capitalize on major price movements and other profit opportunities in different sectors of the world economy. Because of the speculative nature of their trading, operational or economic trends have little relevance to the Partnership’s results, and its past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results. The General Partners believe, however, that there are certain market conditions — for example, markets with major price movements — in which the Partnership has a better opportunity of being profitable than in others.

The Advisors’ programs do not predict price movements. No fundamental economic supply or demand analysis is used in attempting to identify mispricings in the market, and no macroeconomic assessments of the relative strengths of different national economies or economic sectors is made. Instead, the programs apply proprietary computer models to analyze past market data, and from this data alone attempt to determine whether market prices are trending. Technical traders such as the Advisors base their strategies on the theory that market prices reflect the collective judgment of numerous different traders and are, accordingly, the best and most efficient indication of market movements. However, there are frequent periods during which fundamental factors external to the market dominate prices.

If the Advisors’ models identify a trend, they signal positions which follow it. When these models identify the trend as having ended or reversed, these positions are either closed out or reversed. Due to their trend-following character, the Advisors programs do not predict either the commencement or the end of a price movement. Rather, their objective is to identify a trend early enough to profit from it and to detect its end or reversal in time to close out the Partnership’s positions while retaining most of the profits made from following the trend.

The performance summaries set forth below outline certain major price trends which the Advisors’ programs have identified for the Partnership during the last three fiscal years. The fact that certain trends were captured does not imply that others, perhaps larger and potentially more profitable trends, were not missed or that the Advisors will be able to capture similar trends in the future. Moreover, the fact that the programs were profitable in certain market sectors in the past does not mean that they will be so in the future.

The performance summaries are an outline description of how the Partnership performed in the past, not necessarily any indication of how it will perform in the future. Furthermore, the general causes to which certain trends are attributed may or may not in fact have caused such trends, as opposed to simply having occurred at about the same time. While there can be no assurance that the Advisors will be profitable even in trending markets, markets in which substantial and sustained price movements occur offer the best profit potential for the Partnership.

2003

        IDS Managed Futures, L.P. reported another solid performance year for 2003. The Partnership posted a gain of 18.58% for the calendar year resulting in a year- end Net Asset Value of $444.82 per unit. The Partnership began the year at $375.12 per unit.

Currency trading was the driving force behind the profitable year. The financial markets were influenced by three dominate themes this past year: the global re-balancing of the U.S. dollar against other major currencies, the accommodative monetary polices of the three largest central banks, and the emergence of China as a global economic power. The latter event had perhaps the single largest effect on the currency, fixed income, energy and grain markets.

The first quarter was highly profitable as the pending war between the U.S. and Iraq, the growing U.S. budget deficit and the shrinking U.S. tax revenues helped propel the Euro against the U.S. dollar, the British pound and the Japanese yen. Energy prices moved to new highs on the possibility of war with Iraq. Fears of supply disruption, record low inventories and colder-than-normal weather were the main fundamental events that supported this upward trend. Once the conflict in Iraq began, energy prices quickly retreated as a result of a rapid U.S. victory diminishing the overall profit for this sector. Gold was the most profitable of the metals as investors turned their attention to this traditional “safe haven” market. Sugar prices, like commodities in general, continued their upward trend producing a nice profit for the Partnership. All in all, the Partnership was up over 10% for the first quarter of the year.

The currency and interest rate sector were the sectors to highlight in the second quarter. Although the quick U.S. victory in Iraq initially provided strength to the U.S. dollar, the reality of the cost of this war fueling a higher budget deficit coupled with a low U.S. savings rate placed downward pressure on the Dollar against most major currencies. Strong gains were posted in the Euro and to a lesser extent the Swiss franc. The interest rate sector was also profitable as market prices continued to rally in response to declining U.S. interest rates. The yields fell to 45-year lows generating profits for most of the interest rate positions. Equities around the globe had mixed results which often occur when markets are in the midst of directional change. The metal sector also suffered a loss for the quarter as a result of volatile trading conditions. Agricultural products were down suffering minor losses. Soybeans, however, were profitable due to low U.S. inventories and an insufficient Brazilian supply. The Partnership posted a gain of about 4% for the second quarter.

The third quarter was the most difficult trading quarter of the year. Positive economic news in the U.S. and parts of Europe reversed the downward trend in the U.S. dollar. This lasted until mid-September when the members of the G-7 met and announced that exchange rates should reflect economic fundamentals. The market perceived this as an invitation to renew U.S. dollar selling causing the foreign exchange sector to be down for the quarter. One bright spot was the profitable position in the Japanese yen against the Dollar which strengthened despite the Bank of Japan’s persistent policy to maintain a weak yen to benefit Japanese exporters. Another effect of the positive economic news was the reversal in bond markets as interest rates began moving higher with anticipation of a global economic recovery. The results were mixed throughout the yield curve. Indices were the lone profitable sector as the upward trend that started in the second quarter was firmly entrenched. Energies suffered a setback due to the sensitivity of weekly inventory news and changing OPEC production levels causing volatile price activity. Metals, both base and precious, were mixed for this period. Overall, the Partnership was down in excess of 5% for the third quarter.

Once again, currencies led the way for a very profitable fourth quarter. Despite a growing U.S. economy, the Dollar moved lower as a result of global asset reallocation. Central banks, including Saudi Arabia, China, India and Korea have been reducing the percentage of U.S. dollars in their respective currency reserves and increasing the percentage in the Euro, British pound and to a lesser extent the Japanese yen. The FOMC stated in December that interest rates would remain low for a considerable period causing the interest rate markets to quickly reverse their course and move lower. This resulted in the largest sector loss for the quarter. Indices were unprofitable due to the volatile trading partly as a result of renewed terrorist threats. Energies were also down in the fourth quarter. Overall, the price of energy continues to move higher due to low inventories and increased demand. China has now surpassed Japan as the second largest importer of crude oil for industrial consumption. Agricultural products and metals made positive contributions to the Partnership as prices rose mainly due to China’s demand for raw materials as well as in response to the Dollar’s weakness. China has now become the largest recipient of direct foreign investment surpassing the U.S.. Performance for the fourth quarter was in excess of 8%.

The Partnership continues to be managed by two independent Commodity Trading Advisors. John W. Henry & Company’s (“JWH”) Financial and Metals program manages the majority of the assets of the Partnership while Sunrise Capital Partner’s (“Sunrise”) Expanded Diversified program manages the balance. The General Partners continue to monitor on-going trading performance and will make additional changes if and when warranted.

2002

During 2002, Limited Partners redeemed units in the amount of $4,920,177 and the General Partners redeemed units in the amount of $125,188. The Partnership achieved realized and unrealized gains of $10,319,175 and interest income of $256,021. Total expenses of the Partnership were $2,740,970, resulting in a profit of $7,834,226 and an increase in the NAV per unit of $89.82.

2002 was a rewarding year for the Partnership. Both of the Partnership’s Advisors, JWH and Sunrise, posted strong results for the year. At year-end, JWH was managing approximately 69% of the assets and Sunrise was managing 31%.

In the first quarter, the world’s financial markets reversed the direction that had begun in December of 2001. Hence, losses were absorbed. Directionless markets continued for much of the first quarter with both Advisors experiencing negative performance. The Partnership was down all three months during the quarter, losing over 9%.

The second quarter began with slightly negative performance in April. At this point, the Partnership’s Advisors had assembled a portfolio poised to profit by a weak U.S. dollar and lower global interest rates. In May and June the portfolio prospered. Investors sold U.S. stocks due to fear of additional accounting abnormalities. This activity put pressure on the U.S. dollar and fuelled a “flight to quality”; the purchasing of global bonds. By the end of June, the Euro had gained approximately 15% on the U.S. dollar for the year. The Partnership was up in excess of 29% for the quarter.

During the third quarter, the interest rate and currency sectors continued their positive performance. Aided by accounting scandals and decreased consumer confidence, the world’s stock markets plunged and cash poured out of Dollars and into bonds. For the quarter, the interest rate sector was up approximately 15%. Gains were also made in the stock index and currency sectors. The Partnership was up every month during the quarter and gained nearly 18% for the quarter.

After two quarters of incredible performance, the Partnership took a break in the first part of the fourth quarter. Bond prices reversed slightly. The U.S. dollar rose against the Euro. However, by year-end, the trends that allowed for stellar performance for much of 2002 resumed and some of the quarters losses were recovered. As had been for much of the year, the non-financial portion of the Partnership’s portfolio had a minimal effect on performance. The Partnership was down approximately 5% in the fourth quarter.

2001

During 2001, total contributions to the Partnership equaled $269,533. Investors redeemed units in the amount of $5,269,285 and the General Partners redeemed units in the amount of $64,032. The Partnership achieved realized and unrealized losses of $2,030,443, resulting in a loss of $3,470,427 and a decrease in the NAV per unit of $32.69.

2001 was a challenging year for the Advisors to the Partnership. Welton, who suffered a prolonged down period, was relieved of management duties. JWH, was up early and then down late in the year. In December, Welton was replaced by Sunrise Capital Partners LLC (Sunrise). Sunrise utilizes its Expanded Diversified Program to manage Partnership assets. This is a broadly diversified program with a 12 year track record. Sunrise was incorporated in 1980.

In the first quarter of 2001, the world’s financial markets continued the price patterns that had allowed for positive performance in the last quarter of 2000. Short positions in the Japanese yen versus the U.S. dollar and Euro accrued profits throughout the first quarter. The Partnership’s long global bond position was the cornerstone of the portfolio and benefited from the first of several interest rate cuts made by the Federal Reserve. The Partnership was up over 9% at the end of the quarter.

Early in the second quarter, an expected cut in European interest rates never occurred. This caused violent trend reversals in both Euro and U.S. dollar denominated bond markets. Positions in these markets were large and had been held for months prior to being closed out. News events such as the re-election of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and inconsistent earnings reports created excessive volatility in the interest rate and currency markets. For the quarter, the Partnership was down all three months and suffered a loss of over 13%.

The third quarter was laden with markets lacking direction. During this time, the Partnership’s portfolio was dominated by currency and interest rate positions. These sectors were unable to sustain long term price moves. A good example of this was the bond market where despite several cuts by the Federal Reserve, bond prices at quarter-end were trading well below the highs they made in March. Lack of a dominant currency led to flat performance in the currency sector. The meandering of markets in the third quarter caused performance to be down in two months. For the quarter, the Partnership was down approximately 3%.

The last quarter of 2001 began positively due to strong performance in the interest rate sector. The Partnership’s long positions in global bond markets benefited from interest rate cuts as well as a “flight to quality” as a result of the September 11 tragedy. However, in November, after economic data indicated a strengthening of the economy, trends in the interest rate and currency sectors reversed. During this period, the U.S. 30-year bond lost close to 10% in value. The currency sector moved in sympathy with interest rates, which also caused portfolio losses. In December, the portfolio benefited from short positions in the Japanese yen. Despite being up over 4% in October and December, the Partnership was down approximately 2% in the fourth quarter.

Effective July 1, James Davison became President of CIS, replacing Bernard Dan. Mr. Davison has been an executive in the futures industry for several years and has extensive experience in Managed Futures. On a similar note, Mark Rzepczynski Ph.D. became President and Chief Investment Officer of JWH effective January 1, 2002. Dr. Rzepczynski has been with JWH since 1998. The General Partners do not feel that these appointments will materially effect on the Partnership.

(d) Inflation

Inflation does have an effect on commodity prices and the volatility of commodity markets; however, continued inflation is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s operations or assets.

(e) Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements

The Partnership does not have any off-balance-sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on its financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to investors.

(f) Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

The net unrealized appreciation of the Partnership open futures and forward currency contracts at December 31, 2003 was $1,253,021.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Introduction

Past Results Are Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Performance.

The Partnership is a speculative commodity pool. The market sensitive instruments held by it are acquired for speculative trading purposes, and all or substantially all of the Partnership’s assets are subject to the risk of trading loss. Unlike an operating company, the risk of market sensitive instruments is integral, not incidental, to the Partnership’s main line of business.

Market movements result in frequent changes in the fair market value of the Partnership’s open positions and, consequently, in its earnings and cash flow. The Partnership’s market risk is influenced by a wide variety of factors, including the level and volatility of interest rates, exchange rates, equity price levels, the market value of financial instruments and commodity contracts, the diversification effects among the Partnership’s open positions and the liquidity of the markets in which it trades.

The Partnership can acquire and/or liquidate both long and short positions in a wide range of different markets. Consequently, it is not possible to predict how a particular future market scenario will affect performance, and the Partnership’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results.

Standard of Materiality

Materiality as used in this section, “Qualitative and Quantitative Disclosures About Market Risk,” is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and the potential losses caused by such movements, taking into account the leverage, optionality and multiplier features of the Partnership’s market sensitive instruments.

Quantifying the Partnership’s Trading Value at Risk

Value at Risk is a measure of the maximum amount which the Partnership could reasonably be expected to lose in a given market sector. However, the inherent uncertainty of the Partnership’s speculative trading and the recurrence in the markets traded by the Partnership of market movements far exceeding expectations could result in actual trading or non-trading losses far beyond the indicated Value at Risk or the Partnership’s experience to date (i.e., “risk of ruin”). In light of the foregoing as well as the risks and uncertainties intrinsic to all future projections, the inclusion of the quantification included in this section should not be considered to constitute any assurance or representation that the Partnership’s losses in any market sector will be limited to Value at Risk or by the Partnership’s attempts to manage its market risk.

Qualitative Forward-Looking Statements

The following quantitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s market risk exposures contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor from civil liability provided for such statements by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (set forth in Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). All quantitative disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor, except for statements of historical fact.

The Partnership’s risk exposure in the various market sectors traded by the Advisors is quantified below in terms of Value at Risk. Due to the Partnership’s mark-to-market accounting, any loss in the fair value of the Partnership’s open positions is directly reflected in the Partnership’s earnings (realized or unrealized) and cash flow (at least in the case of exchange-traded contracts in which profits and losses on open positions are settled daily through variation margin).

Exchange maintenance margin requirements have been used by the Partnership as the measure of its Value at Risk. Maintenance margin requirements are set by exchanges to equal or exceed the maximum losses reasonably expected to be incurred in the fair value of any given contract in 95% - 99% of any one-day intervals. The maintenance margin levels are established by dealers and exchanges using historical price studies as well as an assessment of current market volatility (including the implied volatility of the options on a given futures contract) and economic fundamentals to provide a probabilistic estimate of the maximum expected near-term one-day price fluctuation. Maintenance margin has been used rather than the more generally available initial margin, because initial margin includes a credit risk component which is not relevant to Value at Risk.

In the case of market sensitive instruments which are not exchange traded (i.e., forward currencies), the margin requirements for the equivalent futures positions have been used as Value at Risk. In those rare cases in which a futures-equivalent margin is not available, dealers’ margins have been used.

The fair value of the Partnership’s futures and forward positions does not have any optionality component. However, Welton also traded commodity options on behalf of the Partnership. The Value at Risk associated with options is reflected in the following table as the margin requirement attributable to the instrument underlying each option. Where this instrument is a futures contract, the futures margin, and where this instrument is a physical commodity, the futures-equivalent maintenance margin has been used. This calculation is conservative in that it assumes that the fair value of an option will decline by the same amount as the fair value of the underlying instrument, whereas, in fact, the fair values of the options traded by the Partnership in all cases fluctuate to a lesser extent than those of the underlying instruments.

In quantifying the Partnership’s Value at Risk, 100% positive correlation in the different positions held in each market risk category has been assumed. Consequently, the margin requirements applicable to the open contracts have simply been aggregated to determine each trading category’s aggregate Value at Risk. The diversification effects resulting from the fact that the Partnership’s positions are rarely, if ever, 100% positively correlated have not been reflected.

The Partnership’s Trading Value at Risk in Different Market Sectors

The following tables indicate the average, highest and lowest amounts of trading Value at Risk associated with the Partnership’s open positions by market category for fiscal year 2003 and 2002. All open position trading risk exposures of the Partnership have been included in calculating the figures set forth below. During fiscal year 2003, the Partnership’s average total capitalization was approximately $32.1 million, and during fiscal year 2002, the Partnership’s average total capitalization was approximately $28.4 million.

* Average, highest and lowest Value at Risk amounts relate to the quarter-end amounts for each calendar quarter-end during the fiscal year. All amounts represent millions of dollars.

** Average Capitalization is the average of the Partnership’s capitalization at the end of each fiscal quarter during the relevant fiscal year.

Material Limitations on Value at Risk as an Assessment of Market Risk

The face value of the market sector instruments held by the Partnership is typically many times the applicable maintenance margin requirement (maintenance margin requirements generally ranging between approximately 1% and 10% of contract face value) as well as many times the capitalization of the Partnership. The magnitude of the Partnership’s open positions creates a “risk of ruin” not typically found in most other investment vehicles. Because of the size of its positions, certain market conditions, unusual, but historically recurring from time to time, could cause the Partnership to incur severe losses over a short period of time. The foregoing Value at Risk table as well as the past performance of the Partnership, give no indication of this “risk of ruin”.

Non-Trading Risk

The Partnership has non-trading market risk on its foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances (as well as any market risk they represent) are immaterial. The Partnership holds substantially all of its assets in cash on deposit with CIS and CISFS. The Partnership has cash flow risk on these cash deposits because if interest rates decline, so will the interest paid out by CIS and CISFS at the 90% of 91-day Treasury bill rate. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership had approximately $21.9 million in cash on deposit with CIS and CISFS.

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Primary Trading Risk Exposures

The following qualitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s market risk exposures except for (i) those disclosures that are statements of historical fact and (ii) the descriptions of how the Partnership and the Advisors manage the Partnership’s primary market risk exposures constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act. The Partnership’s primary market risk exposures as well as the strategies used and to be used by the Advisors for managing such exposures are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of the Partnership’s risk controls to differ materially from the objectives of such strategies. Government interventions, defaults and expropriations, illiquid markets, the emergence of dominant fundamental factors, political upheavals, changes in historical price relationships, an influx of new market participants, increased regulation and many other factors could result in material losses as well as in material changes to the risk exposures and the risk management strategies of the Partnership. There can be no assurance that the Partnership’s current market exposure and/or risk management strategies will not change materially or that any such strategies will be effective in either the short or long-term. Investors must be prepared to lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Partnership.

The following were the primary trading risk exposures of the Partnership as of December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002, by market sector.

Interest Rates. Interest rate risk is a major market exposure of the Partnership. Interest rate movements directly affect the price of the sovereign bond positions held by the Partnership and indirectly the value of its stock index and currency positions. Interest rate movements in one country as well as relative interest rate movements between countries materially impact the Partnership’s profitability. The Partnership’s primary interest rate exposure is to interest rate fluctuations in the United States and the other G-7 countries. However, the Partnership also takes positions in the government debt of smaller nations e.g., Australia and New Zealand. The General Partners anticipate that G-7 interest rates will remain the primary market exposure of the Partnership for the foreseeable future. The changes in interest rates which have the most effect on the Partnership are changes in long-term, as opposed to short-term, rates. Most of the speculative positions held by the Partnership are in medium- to long-term instruments. Consequently, even a material change in short-term rates would have little effect on the Partnership were the medium to long-term rates to remain steady.

Currencies. The Partnership's currency exposure is to exchange rate fluctuations, primarily fluctuations which disrupt the historical pricing relationships between different currencies and currency pairs. These fluctuations are influenced by interest rate changes as well as political and general economic conditions. The Partnership trades in a large number of currencies, including cross-rates (i.e., positions between two currencies other than the U.S. dollar). However, the Partnership's major exposures have typically been in the dollar/yen, dollar/Euro, dollar/Swiss franc and dollar/pound positions. The General Partners do not anticipate that the risk profile of the Partnership's currency sector will change significantly in the future. The currency trading Value at Risk figure includes foreign margin amounts converted into U.S. dollars with an incremental adjustment to reflect the exchange rate risk inherent to the U.S. dollar-based Partnership in expressing Value at Risk in a functional currency other than U.S. dollars.

Stock Indices. The Partnership’s primary equity exposure is to equity price risk in the G-7 countries. As of December 31, 2003, the Partnership’s primary exposure was in the E Nasdaq, Euro DJ, OSE Nikkei (Japan) and SFE SPI 200 (Australia). As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership’s primary exposure was in the SFE SPI 200 and the DAX stock indices. The General Partners anticipate little trading in non-G-7 stock indices. The Partnership is primarily exposed to the risk of adverse price trends or static markets in the major U.S., European and Japanese indices. (Static markets would not cause major market changes but would make it difficult for the Partnership to avoid being “whipsawed” into numerous small losses.)

Metals. The Partnership's metals market exposure is to fluctuations in the price of gold and silver as well as various industrial metals. The Advisors have from time to time taken substantial positions as they have perceived market opportunities to develop. The General Partners anticipate that trading will continue across most of the available metals contracts.

Commodities. The Partnership's primary commodities exposure is to agricultural price movements which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions. Corn, wheat, beans, soybean oil and sugar accounted for the substantial bulk of the Partnership's commodities exposure as of December 31, 2003. In the past, the Partnership also has had material market exposure to cotton, live cattle, coffee and soybean complex and may do so again in the future. The Partnership will continue to trade a variety of commodity contracts.

Energy. The Partnership's primary energy market exposure is to gas and oil price movements, often resulting from political developments in the Middle East. Although the Advisors trade natural gas to a limited extent, oil and oil products are by far the dominant energy market exposure of the Partnership. Oil prices can be volatile and substantial profits and losses have been and are expected to continue to be experienced in this market.

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Non-Trading Risk Exposure

The following were the only non-trading risk exposures of the Partnership as of December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002.

Foreign Currency Balances. The Partnership’s primary foreign currency balances are in Japanese yen, Euros, British pounds and Australian dollars. The Partnership controls the non-trading risk of these balances by regularly converting these balances back into U.S. dollars (no less frequently than twice a month).

Cash Position. The Partnership holds substantially all its assets in cash at CIS and CISFS, earning interest at 90% of the average 91-day Treasury bill rate for Treasury bills issued during each month.

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Means of Managing Risk Exposure

The General Partners monitor the Partnership’s performance and the concentration of its open positions, and consult with the Advisors concerning the Partnership’s overall risk profile. If the General Partners felt it necessary to do so the General Partners could require the Advisors to close out individual positions as well as entire programs traded on behalf of the Partnership. However, any such intervention would be a highly unusual event. The General Partners primarily rely on the Advisors own risk control policies while maintaining a general supervisory overview of the Partnership’s market risk exposures.

Risk Management

JWH attempts to control risk in all aspects of the investment process from confirmation of a trend to determining the optimal exposure in a given market, and to money management issues such as the startup or upgrade of investor accounts. JWH double checks the accuracy of market data, and will not trade a market without multiple price sources for analytical input. In constructing a portfolio, JWH seeks to control overall risk as well as the risk of any one position, and JWH trades only markets that have been identified as having positive performance characteristics. Trading discipline requires plans for the exit of a market as well as for entry. JWH factors the point of exit into the decision to enter (stop loss). The size of JWH’s positions in a particular market is not a matter of how large a return can be generated, but of how much risk it is willing to take relative to that expected return.

To attempt to reduce the risk of volatility while maintaining the potential for excellent performance, proprietary research is conducted on an ongoing basis to refine the JWH investment strategies. Research may suggest substitution of alternative investment methodologies with respect to particular contracts; this may occur, for example, when the testing of a new methodology has indicated that its use might have resulted in different historical performance. In addition, risk management research and analysis may suggest modifications regarding the relative weighting among various contracts, the addition or deletion of particular contracts from a program, or a change in position size in relation to account equity. The weighting of capital committed to various markets in the investment programs is dynamic, and JWH may vary the weighting at its discretion as market conditions, liquidity, position limit considerations and other factors warrant.

JWH may determine that risks arise when markets are illiquid or erratic, such as may occur cyclically during holiday seasons, or on the basis of irregularly occurring market events. In such cases, JWH at its sole discretion may override computer-generated signals and may at times use discretion in the application of its quantitative models, which may affect performance positively or negatively.

Adjustments in position size in relation to account equity have been and continue to be an integral part of JWH’s investment strategy. At its discretion, JWH may adjust the size of a position in relation to equity in certain markets or entire programs. Such adjustments may be made at certain times for some programs but not for others. Factors which may affect the decision to adjust the size of a position in relation to account equity include ongoing research, program volatility, assessments of current market volatility and risk exposure, subjective judgment, and evaluation of these and other general market conditions.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Reference is made to the financial statements and the notes thereto appearing later in this document.

The following summarized quarterly financial information presents the results of operations and other data for three-month periods ended March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31, 2003 and 2002. This information has not been audited.

There were no extraordinary, unusual or infrequently occurring items recognized in each full calendar quarter within the two most recent fiscal years, and the Partnership has not disposed of any segments of its business. There have been no year-end adjustments that are material to the results of any fiscal quarter reported above.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Under the supervision and with the participation of the management of CIS Investments, Inc., a General Partner of the Partnership, including CISI’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of fiscal year 2003, and, based on their evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of CISI have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective. There were no significant changes in the Partnership’s internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.

Part III

Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant

The Partnership is managed by its General Partners, IDS Futures Corporation and CIS Investments, Inc. The officers and directors of the General Partners as of December 31, 2003 were as follows:

IDS Futures Corporation

Kristi L. Petersen (born March 1965) is President of IDS Futures Corporation. Ms. Petersen was elected President of IDS Futures in October 2000. Ms. Petersen has been employed by American Express Financial Corporation since August 1997. Since July 2000, she has held the title Vice President of the Non-Proprietary Products Group of American Express Financial Corporation. She has overall responsibility for the non-proprietary products offered through American Express Financial Advisors’ direct investment and limited partnership business. From 1997 to 2000, Ms. Petersen was director of Product Strategy and Development for retirement and wrap products. From 1987 to 1997, she has held numerous product management, strategic planning and financial audit positions within the financial services industry. From June 1995 to July 1997, she was Senior Product Manager of the Investment Products and Business Retirement Plans for U.S. Bank responsible for the overall management and profitability of investment products and business retirement plans distributed through U.S. Bancorp Investments. From August 1994 to September 1995, Ms. Petersen was a Strategic Planning Analyst for U.S. Bank which developed “Bank 2000", the strategic plan for the retail bank through the year 2000. She graduated from St. Cloud State University with a B.S. degree in Finance in 1987 and the University of St. Thomas in 1994 with a M.B.A. in Marketing.

Peter Slattery (born July 1965) is Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of IDS Futures Corporation. Mr. Slattery was elected Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of IDS Futures Corporation in August 2001. Mr. Slattery is senior vice president of American Express Asset Management and managing director, American Express Alternative Investments. Mr. Slattery is responsible for the development, management and marketing of American Express’ Hedge Fund of Funds products and is a member of the senior management team overseeing the entire alternative investment business. Mr. Slattery has over eight years of due diligence and manager selection experience at American Express. He has served as the director of variable asset product development and management, vice president of non-proprietary products, having responsibility for due-diligence and manager selection for all outside asset managers, and president of IDS Futures Corporation overseeing American Express’ managed futures business. Mr. Slattery holds a B.S. from Babson College and M.B.A. from the University of Colorado.

CIS Investments, Inc.

James A. Davison (born in May 1961) is Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and a director. Mr. Davison is a graduate of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. He began his career with Cargill plc and joined Cargill Investor Services Ltd. in 1987. His management responsibilities included commodity and financial markets as well as the development of all business activity with alternative asset management clients in European and Middle Eastern geographies. He resigned from Cargill plc in 1996 to establish his own consultancy business. One of his assignments of this business included Managing Director for Hasenbichler Asset Management Ltd., one of Europe’s largest alternative asset management groups and, in 1998, he assumed responsibility for all international activity of a portfolio of trading advisors. He re-joined Cargill plc in December 2000 as European Managing Director of Cargill Investor Services Ltd. and was named Worldwide Business Unit Leader of CIS in July of 2001.

Leslie S. Allan (born in December 1961) is President and Chief Operating Officer. He joined CIS in 2003 with over twenty years experience in global financial markets and equities. Mr. Allan’s responsibilities include the execution of the CIS strategy and the global leadership of the Client Product Group.
Previously, Mr. Allan served as Managing Director for Lehman Brothers (London), where he managed a global team of twenty-one people dedicated to providing services to hedge fund customers, including event-arbitrage strategies and finance products. Prior to this, he had responsibility for similar activities as Executive Director, Global Equity Derivatives, for Deutsche Bank A.G. (London).
Mr. Allan’s other industry experience includes institutional equities sales on behalf of Jefferies International PLC, where he also created the Special Situation Equity Sales Team. Between 1984 and 1993, as Senior Vice President of U.S. Equity Sales based in Los Angeles, he co-founded the London Office, managed a portfolio of twenty institutional customers, and was a Trustee of the firm’s International Pension Fund. Mr. Allan was also responsible for U.S. equity sales trading as an Executive Director with Goldman Sachs International (London) from 1993 through 1995. He began his industry career in 1981 as an Investment Dealer and Analyst with Ivory and Sime PLC in his hometown of Edinburgh, Scotland.

Dale F. H. Martin (born in June 1959) is Senior Vice President and Chief Knowledge Officer. Mr. Martin received a B.S. in Physics and General Science from Gustavus Adolphus College, and a second B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Washington University. He also holds a M.B.A. from St. Thomas University. Mr. Martin is responsible for the development and management of CIS' global processes, operating platforms, and service to clients.
Mr. Martin joined Cargill, Incorporated in 1990 as a Development Manager in the U.S. In 1993, he transferred to the U.K. to serve as IT Director and then relocated back to the U.S. in 1997 with Cargill Energy Trading. Mr. Martin joined CIS in 2000. Prior to joining Cargill, Mr. Martin worked for Sperry Rand. He held various positions during his nine years with the firm, including Microprocessor Designer, Strategic Planner, and Program Manager.

Shaun D. O’Brien (born in November 1964) is Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice President and a director. Mr. O’Brien became a Vice President and a director of CIS on July 1, 1999. Mr. O’Brien graduated from Northeastern University in 1987 and received a Master’s degree from the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Management in 1999. Mr. O’Brien began working for Cargill in 1988 and joined CIS in 1999.

Barbara A. Pfendler (born in May 1953) is Vice President and a director. Ms. Pfendler is a graduate of the University of Colorado, Boulder. She began her career with Cargill, Incorporated in 1975. She held various merchandising and management positions within the organization’s Oilseed Processing Division before transferring to CIS in 1986 where she is responsible for the Fund Services Group. She was appointed Vice President of CISI in May 1990 and Vice President of CIS in June 1996. She is a past member of the International Advisory Committee for the Managed Funds Association and currently serves on the CPO/CTA Advisory Committee for the National Futures Association.

Christopher Malo (born in August 1956) is Vice President. Mr. Malo graduated from Indiana University in 1978 with a B.S. in Accounting and further completed the University of Minnesota Executive Program in 1993. He started work at Cargill, Incorporated in June 1978. He joined CIS in 1979, and served as Secretary/Treasurer and Controller from 1983 until 1991. He was elected Vice President, Administration and Operations in July 1991. He was Managing Director in Europe from 1996 until January 1999, responsible for CIS activities and operations in Europe, the Middle East and Russia. He was an active member of the FIA-UK Chapter and LIFFE Membership and Rules Committee. He has served on the Board of the FIA in Chicago.

Patrice H. Halbach (born in August 1953) is a Vice President. Ms. Halbach graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Minnesota with a B.A. degree in history. In 1980 she received a J.D. degree cum laude from the University of Minnesota. She is a member of the Tax Executives Institute, the American Bar Association and the Minnesota Bar Association. Ms. Halbach joined the Law Department of Cargill, Incorporated in February 1983. She had previously been an attorney with Fredrikson & Byron, Minneapolis, Minnesota. In December 1990, she was named Senior Tax Manager for Cargill, Incorporated’s Tax Department and became Assistant Tax Director in March 1993. She was named Assistant Vice President of Cargill, Incorporated’s Administrative Division in April 1994. In January 1999, she was named Vice President, Tax, of Cargill, Incorporated. In her current position as Vice President, Tax, Ms. Halbach oversees Cargill, Incorporated’s global tax function.

Jennifer S. Johnston (born in January 1967) is Treasurer. Ms. Johnston became a Vice President of CIS in October 2002. Ms. Johnson graduated from the University of Illinois in 1989 with a B.S. in Finance. Ms. Johnston began working at CIS in 1990. She has worked in various departments at CIS during her 14 year career.

Penelope J. Beckhardt (born November 1965) is Chief Compliance Officer and Secretary. Ms. Beckhardt graduated from the University of Wisconsin, Madison with a B.B.A. in Marketing in 1987 and received an M.B.A. with a Finance concentration from Loyola University of Chicago in 1989. She began her career at the Chicago Board of Trade in the Office of Investigations and Audits. In March 1993, she moved to LFG, L.L.C. and served in both Compliance Specialist and Accounting Manager roles. Ms. Beckhardt continued her career with UBS Warburg as Associate Director and N.A. Head of Exchange Traded Derivatives Compliance from June 1997 through March 2002. She began working for CIS in March 2002. She is currently a member of the FIA Law and Compliance Division.

The following are additional officers of CISI: James Clemens, Assistant Secretary; Lillian Lundeen, Assistant Secretary; Anne R. Carlson, Assistant Secretary; Jeanne Y. Smith, Assistant Secretary; and Lynn M. Dasso, Assistant Secretary.

Each officer and director holds such office until the election and qualification of his or her successor or until his or her earlier death, resignation or removal.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

The Partnership does not have a board of directors but instead is operated and managed by the General Partners. CISI is responsible for engaging the Partnership’s independent auditors. CISI has not created an audit committee of its board of directors; therefore, the entire board of directors of CISI generally acts as the audit committee with respect to the Partnership. With respect to the engagement of the independent auditors for the Partnership, CISI’s board of directors follows the guidance of the audit committee of Cargill, Incorporated with respect to the selection of the auditors for Cargill, Incorporated and its divisions and subsidiaries. The audit committee of Cargill, Incorporated is comprised of three or more directors who are independent of management of Cargill, Incorporated and its divisions and subsidiaries.

Shaun D. O’Brien, whose biographical information is set forth above in this Item 10 under “CIS Investments, Inc.”, acts as the audit committee financial expert for CISI with respect to the Partnership. Mr. O’Brien is an employee of Cargill Investor Services, Inc., an affiliate of the CISI, and therefore is not “independent” as that term is used in Item 7(d)(3)(iv) of Schedule 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Code of Ethics

The Partnership does not have any officers; therefore, it has not adopted a code of ethics applicable to the Partnership’s principal executive officer principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and persons performing similar functions. CISI is primarily responsible for the day to day administrative and operational aspects of the Partnership’s business. CISI has adopted a code of ethics that applies to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and persons performing similar functions and a copy of such code is included in Exhibit 14.01.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

The Partnership has no officers or directors. The General Partners, IDS Futures and CISI, administer the business and affairs of the Partnership (exclusive of Partnership trading decisions which are made by independent commodity trading advisors). The officers and directors of the General Partners receive no compensation from the Partnership for acting in their respective capacities with the General Partners.

All operating and administrative expenses attributable to the Partnership are paid by the General Partners except for brokerage commissions, NFA, clearing and exchange fees, advisory fees, legal, accounting, auditing, printing, recording and filing fees and postage charges which are paid directly by the Partnership. All expenses other than brokerage commissions incurred by the Partnership and administrative fees are paid to persons not affiliated with the Partnership. For the services performed through December 31, 1992 on behalf of the Partnership, the General Partners received an annual administrative fee totaling 1.75% of the Partnership’s net assets. On January 1, 1993 this fee was reduced to 1.375%. Then General Partners received a total $422,653 in 2003, $384,306 in 2002 and $501,652 in 2001.

CIS, an affiliate of CISI, is the Partnership’s clearing broker. The broker for forward contracts is CISFS. During the year-ended December 31, 2003, the Partnership accrued and paid $664,660 in brokerage commissions to CIS and CISFS, as compared to $532,046 in 2002 and $1,247,465 in 2001. Of these commissions, $20 per round turn trade is paid to AEFA as the Partnership’s introducing broker and $15 is retained by CIS as clearing broker (based on a commission rate of $35 per round turn trade). Prior to September 1, 1995, $30 per round turn trade was paid to AEFA and $20 was retained by CIS (based on a commission rate of $50 per round turn trade).

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services

Part IV

Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statements, Schedules and Reports on Form 8-K

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Date: March 29, 2004    IDS Managed Futures, L.P.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the date indicated.

Date: March 29, 2004

Index to Exhibits