UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

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

For the quarterly period ended SeptemberJune 30, 20032004 Commission File Number: 0-16515

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

Delaware	06-1189438
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

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)

Not Applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report.)

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 whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 or the Exchange Act). |_| Yes |X| No

The number of units outstanding, as of ~~September~~June 30, ~~2003~~2004, is 7264,~~786~~771.6477.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
	Item 1. Financial Statements
		Statements of Financial Condition (unaudited)
		Statements of Operations (unaudited)
		Statement of Changes in Unitholders’ Capital (unaudited)
		Statement of Changes in Partners’ Capital (unaudited)
		Notes to Financial Statements
		Schedule of Investments (unaudited)
		Condensed Schedule of Investments (unaudited)
	Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
	Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
	Item 4. Controls and Internal Procedures
	Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Part II. OTHER INFORMATION
	Item 1. Legal Proceedings
	Item 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds
	Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
	Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
	Item 5. Other Information
	Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
	SIGNATURES
EXHIBIT 31.01 - Certifications of Principal Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 31.02 - Certifications of Principal Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32 - Section 1350 Certification
EXHIBIT 32.01 - Section 1350 Certification
FORM 10-K DECEMBER 31, 2002

PART I1 –- FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements

Following are Financial Statements for the fiscal quarter ended ~~September~~June 30, ~~2003~~2004 and the additional time frames as noted:

	Fiscal QuarterEnded 9/30/03	Year to DateEnded 9/30/03	Fiscal YearEnded 12/31/02	Fiscal QuarterEnded 9/30/02	Year to DateEnded 9/30/02
	Fiscal QuarterEnded 06/30/04	Year to DateEnded 06/30/04	Fiscal YearEnded 12/31/03	Fiscal QuarterEnded 06/30/03	Year to DateEnded 06/30/03
Statements of Financial Condition	X		X
Statements of Operations	X	X		X	X
Statement of Changes in Partners' Capital		X
Notes to Financial Statements	X

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (unaudited)

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
		June 30, 2004		Dec. 31, 2003
		(unaudited)
ASSETS
Assets:
Equity in commodity futures trading accounts:
Cash on deposit with Brokers	$	18,351,021	$	21,891,857
Unrealized (loss) gain on open contracts		(777,408)		1,253,021
Investment in other commodity pools		7,124,581		8,402,085

		24,698,194		31,546,963

Interest receivable		18,724		13,919
Prepaid General Partner fees		213,645		0
Redemptions receivable from other commodity pools		295,325		343,520

Total assets	$	25,225,888	$	31,904,402

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' CAPITAL
Liabilities:
Accrued commissions	$	25,430	$	16,284
Accrued exchange, clearing and NFA fees		363		345
Accrued management fees		29,438		38,540
Accrued incentive fees		0		49,765
Accrued operating expenses		21,391		38,000
Redemptions payable		590,645		685,784

Total liabilities		667,267		828,718

Partners' capital:
Limited partners (62,942.36 units outstanding at June 30, 2004, 68,031.46 units outstanding at December 31, 2003)		23,864,988		30,261,921
General partners (1,829.41 units outstanding at June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003)		693,633		813,763

Total parters' capital		24,558,621		31,075,684

Total liabilities and partners' capital	$	25,225,888	$	31,904,402

Net asset value per unit	$	379.16	$	444.82

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

		Sept. 30, 2003		Dec. 31, 2002
IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (unaudited)
		(unaudited)
		Apr. 1, 2004throughJune 30, 2004		Jan. 1, 2004throughJune 30, 2004		Apr. 1, 2003throughJune 30, 2003		Jan. 1, 2003throughJune 30, 2003
Assets
Revenues:
Assets:
Gain (loss) on trading of:
Equity in commodity futures:
Realized (loss) gain on closed positions	$	(3,795,695)	$	(1,588,750)	$	2,216,977	$	7,868,530
Cash on deposit with Brokers	$	21,288,648	$	19,456,264
Change in unrealized loss on open positions		(491,968)		(2,030,429)		(404,905)		(2,885,999)
Unrealized gain on open futures contracts		912,244		2,028,869
Interest income		50,873		95,812		56,358		112,610
Investment in other commodity pools		7,762,816		9,479,498
Income from investment in other commodity pools		(980,918)		41,418		154,442		951,917
		29,963,707		30,964,631
Foreign currency transaction (loss) gain		(40,333)		(30,686)		78,701		92,528
Interest Receivable		15,920		18,612
Total revenues		(5,258,041)		(3,512,635)		2,101,573		6,139,586
Prepaid General Partners fee		105,663		0
Expenses:
Redemptions receivable from other commodity pools		140,053		157,700
Commissions		160,380		299,266		192,401		318,371
Total Assets		30,225,343		31,140,943
Exchange, clearing and NFA fees		1,267		2,541		1,176		2,226
Liabilities and Partners' Capital
Management fees		94,099		211,969		123,703		245,122
Liabilities:
Incentive fees		0		83,070		313,749		663,111
Accrued commissions		19,442		17,677
Administrative fees		106,823		213,645		105,663		211,326
Accrued exchange, clearing and NFA fees		239		168
Operating expenses		9,500		19,000		9,500		19,000
Accrued management fees		37,067		35,782
Total expenses		372,069		829,491		746,192		1,459,156
Accrued operating expenses		24,308		38,000
Net (loss) income	$	(5,630,110)	$	(4,342,126)	$	1,355,381	$	4,680,430
Redemptions payable		275,280		310,912
(LOSS) PROFIT PER UNIT OF PARTNERSHIP INTEREST	$	(84.06)	$	(65.66)	$	16.97	$	57.40
Total liabilities		356,336		402,539
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
Partners' Capital:
Limited partners (70,957.22 units outstanding at September 30, 2003, 80,114.46 units outstanding at December 31, 2002)		29,118,279		30,052,162
General partners (1,829.41 units outstanding at September 30, 2003, 1,829.41 units outstanding at December 31, 2002)		750,728		686,242
Total parters' capital		29,869,007		30,738,404
Total liabilities and partners' capital	$	30,225,343	$	31,140,943
Net asset value per outstanding unit of parternship interest	$	410.36	$	375.12
See accompanying notes to financial statements.

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (unaudited)

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL For the period January 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004 (unaudited)
	Units*		Limited Partners		General Partners		Total

Partners' capital at January 1, 2004	68,031.46	$	30,261,921	$	813,763	$	31,075,684

Net loss			(4,221,996)		(120,130)		(4,342,126)

Redemptions	(5,089.10)		(2,174,937)		0		(2,174,937)

Partners' capital at June 30, 2004	62,942.36	$	23,864,988	$	693,633	$	24,558,621

Net asset value per unit January 1, 2004			444.82		444.82

Net loss per unit			(65.66)		(65.66)

Net asset value per unit June 30, 2004		$	379.16	$	379.16

* Units of limited partnership interest.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

		July 1, 2003throughSept. 30, 2003		Jan. 1, 2003throughSept. 30, 2003		July 1, 2002throughSept. 30, 2002		Jan. 1, 2002throughSept. 30, 2002
Revenues:
Gain (loss) on trading of:
Realized (loss) gain on closed positions	$	(2,521,912)	$	5,346,618	$	6,862,608	$	8,542,723
Change in unrealized gain (loss) on open contracts		1,769,375		(1,116,624)	$	(1,213,577)	$	1,282,093
Interest income		49,737		162,347	$	77,153	$	191,253
Income from investment in other commodity pools		(503,363)		448,554		877,913		1,831,944
Foreign currency transaction (loss) gain		(52,149)		40,379		14,221		57,599
Other revenue		33,749		33,749		0		0
Total revenues		(1,224,563)		4,915,022		6,618,318		11,905,612
Expenses:
Commissions		195,206		513,577		106,607		398,854
Exchange, clearing and NFA fees		1,374		3,600		505		4,055
Management fees		114,141		359,263		114,244		277,157
Incentive fees		0		663,111		1,087,429		1,376,333
General partners fee to IDS Futures Corp. and CISI		105,663		316,990		96,077		288,231
Operating expenses		9,500		28,500		9,500		28,606
Total expenses		425,884		1,885,042		1,414,362		2,373,236
Net (loss) profit	$	(1,650,448)	$	3,029,981	$	5,203,956	$	9,532,376
(Loss) profit per unit of partnership interest	$	(22.16)	$	35.24	$	60.08	$	109.63
See accompanying notes to financial statements.

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 2004

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN UNITHOLDERS' CAPITAL From January (1,) 2003General throughInformation Septemberand 30, 2003 (unaudited)Summary

	Units*		LimitedPartners		GeneralPartners		Total
Partners' capital at January 1, 2003	80,114.46	$	30,052,160	$	686,244	$	30,738,403
Net profit			2,965,497		64,484		3,029,981
Redemptions	(9,157.24)		(3,899,377)		0		(3,899,377)
Partners' capital at September 30, 2003	70,957.22	$	29,118,279	$	750,728	$	29,869,007
Net asset value per unit January 1, 2003			375.12		375.12
Net profit per unit			35.24		35.24
Net asset value per unit September 30, 2003		$	410.36	$	410.36
* Units of Limited Partnership interest.
See accompanying notes to financial statements.

IDS Managed Futures, L.P. (the Partnership), a limited partnership organized on December 16, 1986 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, was formed to engage in the speculative trading of commodity interests including futures contracts, forward contracts, physical commodities, and related options thereon pursuant to the trading instructions of independent trading advisors. The Partnership began trading on June 16, 1987. The General Partners are IDS Futures Corporation (IDSFC) and CIS Investments, Inc. (CISI) (collectively, the General Partners). The clearing broker is Cargill Investor Services, Inc. (Clearing Broker or CIS), the parent company of CISI. The broker for forward contracts is CIS Financial Services, Inc. (CISFS or Forwards Currency Broker), an affiliate of CISI. The Clearing Broker and the Forwards Currency Broker will collectively be referred to as the Brokers.

Units of limited partnership interest representing an investment of $80,000,000 were offered through April 30, 2001 by American Express Financial Advisors, Inc. (AEFA Advisors), formerly IDS ~~MANAGED~~Financial ~~FUTURES~~Services Inc. By May 1, 2001, a total of 239,274.23 units representing a total investment of $66,263,938 of limited partnership interests had been sold in the combined offerings. During the offerings, the General Partners purchased a total of 2,883.57 additional units representing a total investment of $560,110. Selling commissions and organizational and offering expenses of $6,133,679 were paid by the limited partners during the offering period. Refer to the IDS Managed Futures, L.P. prospectus ~~NOTES~~dated TOApril ~~FINANCIAL~~11, ~~STATEMENTS~~2000, as supplemented January 1, 2001, for further details concerning the offerings. Commencing May 1, 2001, the Partnership no longer accepts new investors.

~~September~~The 30Partnership shall be terminated on December 31, ~~2003~~2006 if none of the following occur prior to that date: (1) investors holding more than 50% of the outstanding units notify the General Partners to dissolve the Partnership as of a specific date; (2) disassociation of the General Partners with the Partnership; (3) bankruptcy of the Partnership; (4) decrease in the net asset value (NAV) to less than $500,000; (5) the Partnership is declared unlawful; or (6) the NAV per unit declines to less than $125 per unit and the Partners elect to terminate the Partnership.

(12) GeneralSummary Informationof andSignificant SummaryAccounting Policies

~~IDS~~The ~~Managed~~accounting ~~Futures, L.P.~~and ~~(the~~reporting ~~Partnership),~~policies aof ~~limited partnership organized on December 16, 1986 under~~ the ~~Delaware Revised Uniform Limited~~ Partnership ~~Act,~~conform ~~was~~to ~~formed~~accounting toprinciples ~~engage~~generally accepted in the ~~speculative~~United ~~trading~~States of ~~commodity~~America ~~interests including futures contracts, forward contracts, physical commodities,~~ and ~~related options thereon pursuant~~ to ~~the~~ ~~trading instructions of independent trading advisors. The Partnership began trading on June 16, 1987. The~~ general ~~partners~~practices ~~are~~within ~~IDS Futures Corporation~~the ~~(IDSFC)~~commodities ~~and CIS Investments, Inc~~industry. ~~(CISI) (collectively, the General Partners).~~ The ~~clearing~~following ~~broker~~ is ~~Cargill~~a ~~Investor~~description ~~Services,~~of ~~Inc. (Clearing Broker or CIS),~~ the ~~parent~~more ~~company~~significant of ~~CISI. The broker for forward contracts is CIS Financial~~ ~~Services,~~those ~~Inc.~~policies ~~(CISFS~~that ~~or Forwards Currency Broker), an affiliate of CISI. The Clearing Broker and~~ the ~~Forwards~~Partnership ~~Currency~~follows ~~Broker~~in ~~will~~preparing ~~collectively~~its ~~be referred~~financial ~~to as the Brokers~~statements.

UnitsRevenue of the Partnership representing an additional investment of $80,000,000 were offered through April 30, 2001 by American Express Financial Advisors, Inc. (AEFA Advisors), formerly IDS Financial Services Inc. By May 1, 2001, a total of 239,274.23 units representing a total investment of $66,263,938 of limited partnership interests had been sold in the combined offerings. During the offerings, the General Partners purchased a total of 2,883.57 additional units representing a total investment of $560,110. Selling commissions and organizational and offering expenses of $6,133,679 were paid by the new limited partners. See the IDS Managed Futures, L.P. prospectus dated April 11, 2000, as supplemented January 1, 2001, for further details concerning the offerings. Recognition

~~The~~Commodity ~~Partnership~~futures contracts, ~~shall~~forward ~~be terminated~~contracts, onphysical ~~December~~commodities ~~31,~~and ~~2006~~related ifoptions ~~none~~are recorded ofon the ~~following~~trade ~~occur~~date. ~~prior~~All tosuch ~~that date:~~transactions ~~(1)~~are ~~investors~~recorded ~~holding~~on ~~more~~the ~~than~~identified cost ~~50%~~basis ofand ~~the~~marked ~~outstanding~~to ~~units~~market ~~notify~~daily. ~~the General~~Unrealized ~~Partners~~gains toon ~~dissolve~~open ~~the~~futures contracts ~~Partnership~~reflected asin the statements of afinancial ~~specific~~condition ~~date;~~represents ~~(2)~~the ~~disassociation~~difference ofbetween ~~the~~original ~~General~~contract ~~Partners~~amount ~~with~~and ~~the~~market ~~Partnership;~~value (3)as ~~bankruptcy~~determined ofby ~~the~~exchange ~~Partnership;~~settlement ~~(4)~~prices ~~decrease~~for infutures ~~the~~contracts, ~~net~~and ~~asset~~related ~~value~~options ~~(NAV)~~and tocash dealer ~~less~~prices ~~than $500,000;~~at ~~(5)~~a ~~the~~predetermined ~~Partnership~~time isfor ~~declared~~forward ~~unlawful;~~contracts, orphysical commodities (6and their related options) ~~the~~as ~~NAV~~of ~~per~~the ~~unit declines~~last tobusiness ~~less~~day ~~than~~of ~~$125~~the ~~per~~year or ~~unit~~as ~~and~~of the ~~Partners~~last ~~elect~~date toof ~~terminate~~ the ~~Partnership~~ financial statements.

~~(2)~~The ~~Summary~~Partnership earns interest on 100% of ~~Significant~~the ~~Accounting~~Partnership’s ~~Policies~~average monthly cash balance on deposit with the Brokers at a rate equal to 90% of the average 91-day Treasury bill rate for U.S. Treasury bills issued during that month.

The accounting and reporting policies of the Partnership conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and to general practices within the commodities industry. The following is a description of the more significant of those policies that the Partnership follows in preparing its financial statements. Redemptions

~~Revenue~~A ~~Recognition~~Limited Partner may cause any or all of his or her units to be redeemed by the Partnership effective as of the last trading day of any month. Redemptions are based on the NAV per unit as of the last day of the month and require ten days’ written notice to the General Partners. Payment will be made within ten business days of the effective date of the redemption. The Partnership’s Limited Partnership Agreement contains a full description of redemption and distribution procedures.

Commodity futures contracts, forward contracts, physical commodities and related options are recorded on the trade date. All such transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis and marked to market daily. Unrealized gain on open futures contracts in the statements of financial condition represents the difference between original contract amount and market value (as determined by exchange settlement prices for futures contracts and related options and cash dealer prices at a predetermined time for forward contracts, physical commodities and their related options) as of the last business day of the year or as of the last date of the financial statements. Commissions

The Partnership ~~earns~~pays CIS ~~interest~~commissions on ~~100%~~trades ofexecuted ~~the~~on ~~Partnership’s~~its ~~average~~behalf ~~monthly~~at ~~cash~~a ~~balance~~rate ~~on deposit~~of ~~with~~$17.50 ~~the~~per ~~Brokers~~half atturn contract. aThe ~~rate~~Partnership ~~equal~~pays tothis ~~90%~~commission ofdirectly ~~the~~to ~~average~~CIS ~~91-day~~and ~~Treasury~~CISFS, and ~~bill~~CIS ~~rate~~then ~~for~~reallocates ~~U.S.~~the ~~Treasury~~appropriate ~~bills~~portion ~~issued~~to ~~during~~AEFA ~~that month~~Advisors.

RedemptionsForeign Currency Transactions

ATrading ~~Limited~~accounts ~~Partner~~in ~~may cause~~foreign ~~any~~currency ordenominations ~~all~~are ofsusceptible ~~his~~both ~~or her units~~ to bemovements ~~redeemed~~in by the ~~Partnership~~underlying contract ~~effective~~markets as ~~of the~~well ~~last~~as ~~trading~~to ~~day~~fluctuation ofin ~~any~~currency ~~month~~rates. ~~Redemptions~~Foreign currencies are ~~based~~translated oninto ~~the~~U.S. ~~NAV~~dollars ~~per~~for ~~unit~~closed ~~as of~~positions ~~the~~at ~~last~~an ~~day~~average ofexchange rate ~~the~~for ~~month and require ten days’ written notice to~~ the ~~General~~ ~~Partners.~~period, ~~Payment~~while ~~will~~period-end bebalances ~~made~~are ~~within~~translated ~~ten~~at ~~business days of~~ the ~~effective~~period-end ~~date~~currency ~~of the redemption~~rates. The ~~Partnership’s~~impact ~~Limited~~of ~~Partnership~~the ~~Agreement contains~~translation ais ~~full~~reflected ~~description~~in ofthe ~~redemption~~statements ~~and distribution procedures~~of operations.

CommissionsUse of Estimates

The ~~Partnership~~preparation ~~pays~~of ~~CIS~~financial ~~commissions~~statements onin ~~trades~~conformity ~~executed~~with onaccounting ~~its~~principles ~~behalf~~generally ataccepted ain ~~rate~~the United States of ~~$17.50~~America ~~per~~requires ~~half~~management ~~turn~~to make estimates and assumptions ~~contract.~~that ~~The~~affect ~~Partnership~~the ~~pays~~reported ~~this~~amounts ~~commission~~of ~~directly~~assets toand ~~CIS~~liabilities and ~~CISFS,~~disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and ~~CIS~~the ~~then~~reported ~~reallocates~~amounts of revenues and expenses during the ~~appropriate~~reporting ~~portion~~period. Actual toresults ~~AEFA~~could ~~Advisors~~differ from those estimates.

Foreign(3) Currency TransactionsFees

~~Trading~~Management ~~accounts~~fees ~~in foreign currency denominations~~ are ~~susceptible~~accrued ~~both~~and topaid ~~movements~~monthly, inincentive ~~the~~fees ~~underlying contract~~are ~~markets~~accrued asmonthly ~~well~~and aspaid toquarterly, ~~fluctuation~~and inGeneral ~~currency~~Partners' administrative ~~rates.~~fees ~~Foreign currencies~~ are ~~translated~~paid ~~into~~annually ~~U.S.~~and ~~dollars~~amortized ~~for~~monthly. Trading ~~closed~~decisions, ~~positions at an average exchange rate~~ for the period, ~~while~~of ~~period-end~~these ~~balances~~financial ~~are~~statements, ~~translated~~were made atby ~~the~~John ~~period-end currency rates~~W. ~~The~~Henry ~~impact~~& ofCompany, ~~the translation is reflected in the statements of operations~~Inc. (JWH).

~~Use~~Under signed agreement, JWH receives a monthly management fee of ~~Estimates~~1/12 of 2% of the month-end NAV of the Partnership under its management and an incentive fee of 20% of the Partnership’s new trading profits, if any, attributable to its management. For the periods ending June 30, 2004 and 2003, JWH was managing approximately 71% of the Partnership’s assets while Sunrise Capital Partners, LLC was indirectly managing 29% of the Partnership’s assets.

The ~~preparation~~Partnership ~~of financial~~pays ~~statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted~~an inannual ~~the~~administrative ~~United~~fee ~~States~~ of ~~America~~1.125% ~~requires management to make estimates~~ and ~~assumptions~~ ~~that~~.25% ~~affect the reported amounts~~ of ~~assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at~~ the ~~date~~beginning of the ~~financial statements~~year ~~and~~NAV of the ~~reported~~Partnership ~~amounts~~to ofIDSFC ~~revenues~~ and ~~expenses~~CISI, ~~during the reporting period~~respectively. ~~Actual results could differ from those estimates.~~

(34) FeesIncome Taxes

~~Management~~No ~~fees~~provision ~~are~~for ~~accrued~~Federal income ~~and~~taxes ~~paid~~has ~~monthly,~~been made in the accompanying financial statements as each ~~incentive~~partner ~~fees~~is ~~are~~responsible ~~accrued~~for ~~monthly~~reporting ~~and~~income ~~paid~~(loss) ~~quarterly,~~based ~~and~~on ~~General~~such ~~Partners'~~partner’s ~~administrative~~pro ~~fees~~rata ~~are~~share ~~paid~~of ~~annually~~the ~~and~~profits ~~amortized~~or ~~monthly~~losses of the Partnership. ~~Trading~~ ~~decisions~~The Partnership is responsible for the Illinois State Partnership Information and Replacement Tax ~~period~~based on the operating results of ~~these~~the ~~financial~~Partnership. ~~statements~~Such ~~were~~tax ~~made~~amounted byto ~~John~~$0 W.for the ~~Henry~~quarters &ended ~~Company~~June 30, ~~Inc.~~2004 ~~(JWH)~~and 2003 and is included in operating expenses in the statements of operations.

The Partnership’s investment ~~pays~~in another commodity pools are recorded at fair value and are subject ~~annual~~to ~~administrative~~the ~~fee~~market and credit risks of ~~1.125%~~financial instruments and commodity contracts held or sold short by those entities.~~25%~~ ofThe Partnership bears the ~~beginning~~risk of ~~the~~loss only ~~year~~to ~~NAV~~the extent of the ~~Partnership~~market tovalue ~~IDSFC~~of ~~and~~its ~~CISI,~~respective ~~respectively~~investments.

The Partnership engages in the speculative trading of U.S. and foreign futures contracts, options on U.S. and foreign futures contracts and forward contracts (4collectively derivatives). These ~~Income~~derivatives ~~Taxes~~include both financial and non-financial contracts held as part of a diversified trading strategy. The Partnership is exposed to both market risk, the risk arising from changes in the market value of the contracts, and credit risk, the risk of failure by another party to perform according to the terms of a contract.

NoThe ~~provision~~purchase ~~for~~and ~~Federal~~sale of ~~income~~futures ~~taxes~~contracts ~~has~~and ~~been~~options ~~made~~on infutures ~~the~~contracts ~~accompanying~~requires ~~financial~~margin ~~statements~~deposits ~~as each~~with ~~partner~~a isFutures ~~responsible~~Commission Merchant (FCM). Additional deposits may be necessary for any ~~reporting~~loss ~~income~~on contract value. The Commodity Exchange Act (~~loss~~CE Act) ~~based~~requires ona ~~such~~FCM to ~~partner~~segregate all customer transactions and assets from the FCM’s ~~pro~~proprietary ~~rata~~activities. ~~share~~A ofcustomer’s ~~the~~cash ~~profits~~and orother ~~losses~~property, ofsuch ~~the~~as ~~Partnership~~U.S. Treasury ~~The~~bills, ~~Partnership~~deposited ~~is responsible~~with ~~for~~a ~~the~~FCM ~~Illinois~~are ~~State~~considered ~~Partnership~~commingled ~~Information~~with ~~and~~all ~~Replacement Tax~~other ~~based~~customer onfunds subject to the ~~operating~~FCM’s ~~results~~segregation ofrequirements. In the ~~Partnership.~~event of ~~Such~~a ~~tax~~FCM’s ~~amounted~~insolvency, torecovery $0may ~~for the~~be ~~quarters~~limited ~~ended~~to ~~September~~a ~~30,~~pro ~~2003~~rata ~~and~~share ~~2002~~of segregated ~~and~~funds available. It is ~~included~~possible inthat ~~operating~~the recovered amount could be ~~expenses~~less inthan the ~~statements~~total of ~~operations~~cash and other property deposited.

~~(5)~~The ~~Trading~~Partnership ~~Activities~~has ~~and~~cash ~~Related~~on deposit ~~Risks~~with an affiliated interbank market maker in connection with its trading of forward contracts. In the event of the interbank market maker’s insolvency, recovery of the Partnership assets on deposit may be limited to account insurance or other protection afforded such deposits. In the normal course of business, the Partnership does not require collateral from such interbank market maker. Because forward contracts are traded in unregulated markets between principals, the Partnership also assumes a credit risk.

~~The~~For ~~Partnership’s~~derivatives, risks ~~investment~~arise from changes in ~~other~~the ~~commodity~~market ~~pools~~value ~~are~~of ~~recorded~~the atcontracts. ~~fair~~Theoretically, ~~value~~the Partnership ~~and~~is ~~are~~exposed ~~subject~~ to ~~the~~a market ~~and~~risk ~~credit~~equal ~~risks~~to the value of ~~financial~~futures ~~instruments~~and forward contracts purchased and ~~commodity~~unlimited liability on such contracts sold ~~held~~short. orAs ~~sold~~both ~~short~~a bybuyer ~~those~~and ~~entities.~~seller ~~The~~of options, the Partnership ~~bears~~pays or receives a premium at the ~~risk~~outset ofand ~~loss only~~then tobears the ~~extent~~risk of ~~the~~unfavorable ~~market~~changes ~~value~~in the price of ~~its~~the ~~respective~~contract ~~investments~~underlying the option.

The ~~Partnership~~notional ~~engages~~amounts inof ~~the~~open ~~speculative~~contracts ~~trading~~at ofJune ~~U.S.~~30, ~~and foreign futures contracts~~2004, ~~options~~as ondisclosed ~~U.S. and~~in ~~foreign~~the ~~futures~~Condensed ~~contracts~~Schedule ~~and forward contracts (collectively derivatives).~~of ~~These~~Investments, ~~derivatives~~do ~~include~~not ~~both~~represent ~~financial~~the ~~and~~Partnership’s ~~non-financial~~risk ~~contracts held as part~~ of aloss ~~diversified~~due ~~trading strategy. The Partnership is exposed~~ to ~~both~~ market and credit risk, ~~the~~but ~~risk~~rather ~~arising~~represent ~~from changes in~~ the ~~market~~extent ~~value~~ of the ~~contracts,~~Partnership’s ~~and~~involvement ~~credit~~in ~~risk,~~derivatives at the ~~risk~~date of ~~failure by another party to perform according to~~ the ~~terms~~statements of afinancial ~~contract~~condition.

~~The~~Net ~~purchase~~trading ~~and~~results ~~sale of~~from ~~futures~~derivatives ~~contracts~~for ~~and~~the ~~options~~quarter onended ~~futures~~June ~~contracts~~30, ~~requires~~2004 ~~margin~~and ~~deposits~~2003, ~~with a~~are ~~Futures~~reflected ~~Commission~~in ~~Merchant (FCM). Additional deposits may be necessary for~~the ~~any~~statements ~~loss~~of onoperations ~~contract~~and ~~value.~~equal ~~The~~gains ~~Commodity Exchange Act~~ (~~CE Act~~losses) ~~requires a FCM to segregate all customer transactions and assets~~ from ~~the~~trading ~~FCM’s proprietary~~less ~~activities~~brokerage commissions. ASuch ~~customer’s~~trading ~~cash~~results ~~and~~reflect ~~other property, such as U.S. Treasury bills, deposited with a FCM are considered commingled with all other customer funds subject to~~ the ~~FCM’s~~net ~~segregation~~gain ~~requirements.~~arising Infrom the ~~event~~ ~~of a FCM~~Partnership’s ~~insolvency,~~speculative ~~recovery~~trading ~~may be limited to a pro rata share~~ of ~~segregated~~ ~~funds~~futures ~~available.~~contracts, Itoptions ison ~~possible that the recovered amount could be~~futures ~~less~~contracts ~~than the total of cash~~ and ~~other~~forward ~~property deposited~~contracts.

The ~~Partnership~~Limited ~~has~~Partners ~~cash on~~bear ~~deposit with an affiliated interbank market maker in connection with its trading of forward contracts. In~~ the ~~event~~risk of ~~the~~loss ~~interbank~~only ~~market maker’s insolvency, recovery of the Partnership assets on deposit may be limited~~ to ~~account~~ ~~insurance or other protection afforded such deposits. In~~ the ~~normal course~~extent of ~~business,~~ the ~~Partnership does not require collateral from such interbank~~ market ~~maker.~~value ~~Because~~of ~~forward~~their ~~contracts are traded in unregulated~~respective ~~markets between principals, the Partnership also assumes a credit risk~~investments.

For(6) derivatives,Investments risks arise from changes in theOther marketCommodity value of the contracts. Theoretically, the Partnership is exposed to a market risk equal to the value of futures and forward contracts purchased and unlimited liability on such contracts sold short. As both a buyer and seller of options, the Partnership pays or receives a premium at the outset and then bears the risk of unfavorable changes in the price of the contract underlying the option. Pools

~~The~~In ~~notional~~December ~~amounts~~2001, ofthe ~~open~~Partnership ~~contracts~~invested atin ~~September~~another ~~30,~~commodity ~~2003~~pool, asIDS ~~disclosed~~Managed inFund ~~the~~LLC ~~Schedule of~~(IDSMF). ~~Investments,~~The doinvestment ~~not~~is ~~represent~~subject ~~the Partnership’s risk of loss due~~ to ~~market and credit risk, but rather represent~~ the ~~extent~~terms of the ~~Partnership’s involvement~~respective inadvisory ~~derivatives~~contract atand other ~~the~~agreements ~~date~~ of ~~the~~this ~~statements~~commodity ~~of financial condition~~pool.

~~Net~~Income ~~trading~~(loss) ~~results~~is ~~from derivatives~~net ~~for~~of the Partnership’s ~~quarter~~proportionate ~~ended~~share ~~September~~of ~~30,~~fees ~~2003~~ and ~~2002,~~expenses ~~are~~incurred ~~reflected~~or incharged ~~the~~by ~~statements~~IDSMF. ofDuring ~~operations~~2004, ~~and~~IDSMF ~~equal~~charged ~~gains~~monthly ~~(losses)~~management ~~from~~fees ~~trading~~of ~~less~~1/12 of 2% of ~~brokerage~~the ~~commissions.~~NAV ~~Such~~and ~~trading~~a ~~results~~quarterly ~~reflect~~incentive ~~the~~fee ~~net~~of ~~gain~~20% ~~arising~~of ~~from~~new trading profits and paid ~~the~~such ~~Partnership’s~~amounts ~~speculative~~to ~~trading~~Sunrise ofCapital ~~futures~~Partners, ~~contracts~~LLC, ~~options~~the ~~on futures~~sole ~~contracts~~Commodity ~~and~~Trading Advisor ~~forward contracts~~(CTA).

~~The~~Investment ~~Limited~~value ~~Partners~~in ~~bear~~IDSMF is based on the proportionate share of units the Partnership has in IDSMF at the end of each month. The Partnership’s risk of loss ~~only~~in its investee pool is limited to ~~the~~its ~~extent~~investment. The Partnership may make additional contributions to or withdrawals from its investment in IDSMF as of the ~~market~~last ~~value~~day of ~~their~~any ~~respective investments~~month.

~~(6)~~Summarized ~~Financial~~information reflecting ~~Statement~~the ~~Preparation~~Partnership’s investment in, and the operations of, the investee pool is as shown in the following table.

The interim financial statements are unaudited but reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair statement of the results for the interim periods presented. These adjustments consist primarily of normal recurring accruals. These interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements of the Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 31, 2003, as part of its Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Investment in IDSMF, January 1, 2004	$	8,402,085
Results of operations of IDSMF:
Revenues		561,082
Management and incentive fees		(430,024)
Other expenses		(79,279)

Net income before allocation to limited partners		51,779
Allocation to the other limited partners		10,362

Partnership's income from investment in IDSMF		41,417

Partnership's redemptions from IDSMF		(1,318,921)

Net asset value of the Partnership's investment in IDSMF, June 30, 2004		7,124,581

The ~~results~~following oftable ~~operations~~is a ~~for~~summary ~~interim periods are not necessarily indicative~~ of ~~the~~IDSMF’s ~~operating~~net ~~results~~assets, ~~to be~~at ~~expected~~June ~~for~~30, ~~the fiscal year~~2004.

(7) Investments in Other Commodity Pools

	Number of contracts		Principal/ notional value		Value/open trade equity
Long positions
Futures positions (-0.41%)
Energy	17	$	776,850	$	(28,380)
Interest rates	33		2,173,224		(3,380)
Metals	23		981,523		(33,837)
Indices	10		826,415		27,853

			4,758,012		(37,744)

Forward positions (-0.23%)
Currencies	29		5,168,898		(21,659)

Total long positions		$	9,926,910	$	(59,403)


Short positions
Futures positions (-1.94%)
Agriculture	9	$	231,120	$	25,380
Interest Rates	197		43,418,918		(91,036)
Metals	52		1,999,710		(113,463)

			45,649,748		(179,119)

Forward positions (-0.07%)
Currencies	18		3,042,122		(6,349)

Total short positions		$	48,691,870	$	(185,468)

Total open contracts (-2.65%)				$	(244,871)
Cash on deposit with brokers (105.84%)					9,793,475
Other assets in excess of liabilities (-3.19%)					(295,641)

Net assets (100%)				$	9,252,963

In December 2001, the Partnership invested in another commodity pool, IDS Managed Fund LLC (IDSMF7). The investmentFinancial is subject to the terms of the respective advisory contract and other agreements of this commodity pool. Highlights

~~Income~~The ~~(loss)~~following isfinancial highlights ~~net~~show of the Partnership’s ~~proportionate~~financial ~~share~~performance offor ~~fees~~the ~~and expenses incurred or charged~~six-month byperiod ~~IDSMF.~~ended ~~During~~June ~~2003~~30, ~~IDSMF~~2004. ~~charged~~Total ~~monthly~~return ~~management~~is ~~fees~~calculated ofas ~~1/12 of 2% of~~ the ~~NAV~~change ~~and~~in a theoretical ~~quarterly~~limited ~~incentive~~partner’s ~~fee~~investment ofover ~~20%~~the ofentire ~~trading~~period ~~profits~~ and ~~paid~~is ~~such~~not ~~amounts~~annualized. toTotal ~~Sunrise~~return ~~Capital~~is ~~Partners,~~calculated ~~LLC~~based ~~(Sunrise),~~on the ~~sole~~aggregate ~~Commodity~~return ~~Trading~~of the ~~Advisor~~Partnership ~~(CTA)~~taken as a whole.

Investment value in IDSMF is based on the proportionate share of units the Partnership has in IDSMF at the end of each month. The Partnership’s risk of loss in its investee pool is limited to its investment. The Partnership may make additional contributions to or withdrawals from its investment in IDSMF as of the last day of any month.

Total Return:
Total return before incentive fees		-14.55%
Less incentive fee allocation		0.21%
Total Return		-14.76%

Ratio to average net assets:
Net income		-14.81%

Expenses:
Expenses		2.55%
Incentive fees		0.28%

Total expenses		2.83%

~~Summarized~~The ~~information~~net income and expense ~~reflecting~~ratios are computed based upon the ~~Partnership’s~~weighted ~~investment~~average ~~in,~~net ~~and~~assets for the Partnership ~~operations~~for ofthe six-month period ended June 30, ~~the~~2004 and are not annualized. ~~investee~~Ratios ~~pool~~do isnot asreflect ~~shown~~income inor ~~the~~expenses ~~following~~related ~~table~~to investment in other commodity pools.

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. Condensed Schedule of Investments June 30, 2004 (unaudited)
Investment in IDSMF, January 1, 2003	$	9,479,498
Results of operations of IDSMF:
	Number of contracts		Principal (notional)		Value (OTE)
Revenues		1,043,735
Long positions
Management and incentive fees		(329,487)
Futures positions (-0.12%)
Other expenses		(174,473)
Interest rates	257	$	12,108,103	$	(20,988)
Net Income before allocation to limited partners		539,774
Metals	68		3,223,038		(16,786)
Allocation to the other limited partners		91,220
Indices	202		8,073,624		7,184
Partnership's income from investment in IDSMF		448,554
			23,404,765		(30,590)
Partnership's redemptions in IDSMF		(2,165,237)
Forward positions (-0.36%)
Net asset value of the Partnership's investment in IDSMF, September 30, 2003		7,762,815
Currencies	15		41,497,104		(89,095)
Total long positions		$	64,901,869	$	(119,685)
Short positions
Futures positions (-1.71%)
Interest Rates	932	$	245,347,620	$	(283,369)
Metals	101		4,421,625		(137,090)
			249,769,245		(420,459)
Forward positions (-0.97%)
Currencies	14		31,939,477		(237,265)
Total short positions		$	281,708,722	$	(657,724)
Total open contracts (-3.16%)				$	(777,409)
Cash on deposit with brokers (74.72%)					18,351,021
Investment in other commodity pools (29.01%)					7,124,581
Other assets in excess of liabilities (-0.57%)					(139,573)
Net assets (100%)				$	24,558,621

(8)Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial HighlightsCondition and Results of Operations

The following financial highlights show the Partnership’s financial performance for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2003. Total return is calculated as the change in an aggregate limited partners’ investment over the entire period (a) percentage changeCapital in the net asset value from December 31, 2002 to September 30, 2003 and is not annualized. Total return is calculated based on the aggregate return of the Partnership taken as a whole. Resources

Total Return:
Total return before incentive fees		11.26%
Less incentive fee allocation		1.87%
Total Return		9.39%
Ratio to average net assets:
Net income		7.95%
Expenses:
Expenses		3.76%
Incentive fees		2.04%
Total expenses		5.80%

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 period-ended June 30, 2004, Limited Partners redeemed a total of 5,089.10 units for $2,174,937 and for the period-ended June 30, 2003, Limited Partners redeemed a total of 6,317.05 units for $2,708,795.

The ~~net~~Partnership’s involvement ~~income~~in the futures and ~~expense~~forward markets exposes the Partnership to both ~~ratios~~market ~~are~~risk ~~computed~~– ~~based~~the ~~upon~~risk arising from changes in the ~~weighted~~market ~~average~~value ~~net~~of ~~assets~~the futures ~~for~~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 ~~for~~is exposed to a market risk equal to the ~~nine~~value of the futures and forward contracts purchased and theoretically unlimited risk of loss on contracts sold short. The Partnership’s commodity trading advisors (Advisors) monitor the Partnership’s trading activities and attempt to control the Partnership’s exposure to market risk by, among other things, refining their trading strategies, adjusting position sizes of the Partnership’s futures and forward contacts and re-~~month~~allocating ~~period~~Partnership ~~ended~~assets ~~September~~to 30different 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 ~~2003~~institutions and ~~are~~then ~~not~~enters into a back-to-back contract with ~~annualized~~the Partnership. ~~Ratios~~The Partnership also may trade on exchanges that do not ~~reflect~~have associated ~~income~~clearing orhouses ~~expenses~~whose ~~related~~credit tosupports ~~investment~~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 ~~commodity~~party ~~pools~~to such trades.

~~IDS~~The ~~MANAGED~~Partnership’s trading ~~FUTURES,~~activities ~~L.P.~~involve ~~Schedule~~varying degrees of ~~Investments~~off-balance ~~September~~sheet ~~30,~~risk ~~2003~~whereby changes ~~(unaudited)~~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.

	Number of contracts		Principal (notional)		Value (OTE)
Long positions
Futures positions (0.05%)
Interest rates	595	$	114,777,407	$	224,996
Metals	296		11,153,450		(12,787)
Indices	75		5,316,470		(197,908)
			131,247,327		14,301
Forward positions (8.41%)
Australian Dollar			1,346,097		36,556
Australian Dollar			2,300,258		53,268
Australian Dollar			1,856,290		1,782
Swiss Franc			6,485,337		234,902
Swiss Franc			3,973,314		155,079
Swiss Franc			4,204,445		36,060
Swiss Franc			3,375,721		37,706
European Euro			4,229,375		116,997
European Euro			6,964,045		47,905
European Euro			81,424		49
British Pound			1,525,739		52,567
British Pound			4,956,169		158,990
British Pound			4,883,357		102,684
British Pound			4,759,246		(3,313)
British Pound			26,477		15
Japanese Yen			3,025,756		143,050
Japanese Yen			4,633,109		217,120
Japanese Yen			14,185,209		670,908
Japanese Yen			1,361,231		63,842
Japanese Yen			18,224		805
Japanese Yen			15,906		703
Japanese Yen			10,986,072		385,089
Total forward positions	22	$	85,192,802	$	2,512,765
Total long positions	988	$	216,440,129	$	2,527,066
Short positions
Futures positions (-0.73%)
Interest Rates	844	$	200,768,658	$	(196,522)
Metals	211		7,714,038		(36,228)
Indices	101		2,831,432		14,011
			211,314,128		(218,739)
Forward positions (-4.67%)
Currencies	12		32,601,156		(1,396,084)
Total short positions	1,168	$	243,915,284	$	(1,614,823)
Total open contracts (3.05%)				$	912,243
Cash on deposit with brokers (71.27%)					21,288,648
Investment in other commodity pools (25.99%)					7,762,816
Other assets in excess of liabilities (-0.32%)					(94,700)
Net assets (100%)				$	29,869,007

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.

~~Item~~During 2.the ~~Management's~~fiscal period-ended ~~Discussion~~June ~~and~~30, ~~Analysis~~2004, ofthe ~~Financial~~Partnership ~~Condition~~had ~~and~~no ~~Results~~credit ofexposure ~~Operations~~to a counterparty which is a foreign commodities exchange which was material.

Fiscal(b) Quarter ended September 30, 2003Liquidity

The Partnership’s ~~recorded~~net assets aare held in brokerage accounts with CIS and CISFS. Except in very unusual ~~loss~~circumstances, the Partnership should be able to close out any or all of ~~$1,650,448~~its open trading positions and liquidate any or ~~$22~~all of its securities holdings quickly and at market prices.16 ~~per~~This ~~unit~~should inpermit the ~~third~~Advisors ~~quarter~~to oflimit ~~2003~~losses as well as reduce market exposure on short notice should their programs indicate reducing market exposure.

The Partnership ~~began the~~earned ~~quarter~~interest inon ~~negative~~100% ~~territory,~~of ~~had~~the aPartnership’s ~~stronger~~average ~~August,~~monthly ~~but~~cash ~~performance~~balance ~~reversed~~at a inrate ~~September~~equal to ~~post~~90% aof ~~negative~~the ~~quarter~~average yield on the 91-day U.S. OnTreasury ~~September~~bills issued during that month. For the period ended June 30, ~~2003~~2004, ~~JWH~~CIS ~~was~~had ~~managing~~paid or accrued ~~73%~~to pay interest of $95,812 to the Partnership’s ~~assets~~and ~~while~~for ~~Sunrise~~the ~~was~~period ~~indirectly~~ended ~~managing~~June ~~27%~~30, 2003, CIS had paid or accrued to pay interest of $112,610 to the Partnership~~’s assets~~.

~~July~~Most ~~was~~United ~~a difficult~~States ~~trading~~commodity ~~month,~~exchanges aslimit ~~there~~the ~~were~~amount ~~significant~~of ~~trend~~fluctuation ~~reversals~~ in ~~major~~commodity ~~markets that~~futures ~~resulted~~contract inprices during a ~~loss.~~single ~~There~~trading ~~were~~day ~~clear~~by ~~signs~~regulations. ~~that~~These ~~the~~regulations specify ~~U.S.~~what ~~economic~~are ~~outlook~~referred ~~was improving,~~to as ~~well~~“daily asprice ~~signs~~fluctuation ~~that~~limits” aor “daily ~~coordinated~~limits”. ~~global~~The ~~economic~~daily ~~recovery~~limits ~~was~~establish ~~also beginning.~~the Inmaximum ~~general,~~amount the price ~~effect~~ of ~~all these factors was~~ a ~~strengthening~~futures ~~U.S. dollar~~contract ~~against~~may ~~most~~vary ~~major~~either ~~currencies,~~up ~~rising~~or ~~global~~down ~~interest~~from ~~rates,~~the ~~mildly~~previous ~~better~~day’s ~~stock~~settlement ~~prices~~price ~~and~~at ~~higher~~the ~~base~~end ~~metal~~of ~~prices.~~a ~~The~~trading ~~fixed~~session. ~~income~~Once ~~sector~~the ~~was~~daily ~~positive~~limit ~~for~~has ~~July.~~been ~~The~~reached ~~best~~in ~~performing~~a ~~components~~particular ofcommodity, ~~the~~no ~~sector~~trades ~~were~~may ~~the~~be ~~short~~made at a ~~U.S.~~price ~~10-year~~beyond ~~note~~the ~~and~~limit. ~~30-year~~Positions ~~bond~~in ~~position.~~the ~~Foreign~~commodity ~~exchange~~could ~~trading~~then ~~had~~be ~~the~~taken or ~~largest~~liquidated ~~loss~~only ~~for~~if ~~July.~~traders ~~The~~are ~~strength~~willing ofto ~~the~~effect ~~U.S.~~trades ~~dollar~~at ~~resulted~~or inwithin ~~losses~~the inlimit during the ~~long~~ ~~British~~period ~~pound,~~for ~~Australian~~trading ~~dollar,~~on ~~Swiss~~such ~~franc~~day. ~~and~~Because the ~~Euro~~“daily ~~positions. All~~limit” ~~equity~~rule ~~indices~~only ~~registered~~governs ~~positive~~price ~~gains~~movement infor ~~July.~~a ~~The~~particular ~~best~~trading ~~performers~~day, init ~~the sector~~does ~~were~~not ~~the~~limit losses. ~~Osaka~~In ~~Nikkei and~~ the ~~German~~past, ~~DAX.~~futures ~~All~~prices ~~components~~have ofmoved the ~~energy sector~~daily ~~were~~limit ~~positive~~for innumerous consecutive ~~July.~~trading ~~Metals~~days ~~were~~and ~~down~~thereby ~~for~~prevented ~~July~~prompt ~~due~~liquidation toof ~~a short position~~futures inpositions ~~gold.~~on ~~Agriculture~~one ~~products~~side ~~were~~of ~~in negative territory for~~ the ~~month. Overall~~market, ~~the~~ ~~Partnership~~subjecting ~~recorded~~commodity afutures ~~loss~~traders holding ofsuch ~~$1,022,744~~positions orto ~~$13.52~~substantial ~~per~~losses ~~unit~~for inthose ~~July~~days.

~~Trending~~It ~~markets~~is ~~enabled the~~also ~~Fund~~possible tofor ~~post a profitable August. Global markets responded to improving~~an ~~economic~~exchange ~~conditions~~or in the ~~U.S.,~~CFTC ~~Japan and,~~ to asuspend ~~lesser~~trading ~~degree,~~in ~~Europe. As~~ a ~~result,~~ ~~interest~~particular ~~rates continued to move higher in these regions~~contract, ~~and the U.S.~~order ~~dollar~~immediate ~~strengthened~~settlement ~~against most major currencies. Energy markets, with the exception~~ of ~~natural gas, continue to escalate due to supply concerns. The fixed income sector was up for the month of August. The vast majority of the profits came from~~ a ~~short~~particular ~~Japanese~~contract, ~~government~~or ~~10-year~~direct ~~bond~~that ~~position.~~trading ~~The foreign exchange sector was negative for August. The strengthening of the Yen against the U.S. dollar resulted~~ in ~~the largest loss in this sector for the month.~~a ~~Equity~~particular ~~indices~~contract ~~were~~be ~~profitable in August. The energy sector and metals were also up in August. Agricultural products were down~~ for ~~the~~liquidation ~~month~~only. The downward trend in grains that started in June reversed in the beginning of August due to harsh weather conditions. All in all, the Partnership recorded a gain of $559,009 or $7.52 per unit in August.

The(c) trendsResults that provided profits in August abruptly turned around in September resulting in a loss for the month. The strength of the economic recovery in the United States was called into question due to the continued weakness in the U.S. government employment numbers. The result was interest rates moving lower again and the U.S. dollar giving back recent gains. Additionally, OPEC announced late in the month that they would be cutting production of crude oil, which reversed the decline in prices. The fixed income sector incurred the largest loss for September. The recovery of the Japanese government bond made the Partnership’s short position the largest loss for the month. Currencies were positive in September. The vast majority of the profits came from the Japanese yen. Indices were negative in September. The losses were spread fairly evenly across the sector. The energy sector incurred the second largest loss for September due to the short position in oil. Metals were positive in September as the profits came from gold, which continued to trend higher in anticipation of higher inflation. Agricultural products were up for September. Overall, the Partnership recorded a loss of $1,186,713 or $16.16 per unit in September. Operations

~~During~~The Partnership’s success depends on the ~~quarter,~~Advisors’ ability to recognize and capitalize on ~~investors~~major ~~redeemed~~price amovements ~~total~~and other profit opportunities in different sectors of ~~2,840.19~~the world ~~units~~economy. AtBecause of the ~~end~~speculative nature of ~~the~~their ~~quarter~~trading, ~~there~~operational ~~were~~or 72economic trends have little relevance to the Partnership’s results,~~786~~ and its past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results.64 ~~units~~The General ~~outstanding~~Partners ~~(including~~believe, 1however,~~829.41~~ ~~units~~that ~~owned~~there byare ~~the~~certain ~~General~~market conditions ~~Partners)~~— for example, markets with major price movements — in which the Partnership has a better opportunity of being profitable than in others.

~~During~~The ~~the~~Advisors’ ~~fiscal~~programs do ~~quarter~~not predict price movements. No fundamental economic supply or demand ~~ending~~analysis ~~June~~is ~~30,~~used ~~2003,~~in attempting to identify mispricings in the ~~Partnership~~market, ~~had~~and no macroeconomic ~~material~~assessments ~~credit~~of ~~exposure~~the torelative astrengths of different national ~~counterparty~~economies ~~which~~or economic sectors is amade. ~~foreign~~Instead, ~~commodity~~the ~~exchange~~programs orapply proprietary computer models to ~~any~~analyze ~~counterparties~~past market data, and from this data alone attempt to ~~dealing~~determine inwhether ~~over~~market prices are trending. Technical traders such as the Advisors ~~counter~~base ~~contracts~~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.

~~Fiscal~~If ~~Quarter~~the Advisors’ models identify a trend, they signal positions which follow it. When these models identify the trend as having ended ~~September~~or 30reversed, ~~2002~~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 ~~recorded~~during athe first and second ~~gain~~quarters of $5fiscal years 2004 and 2003. The fact that certain trends were captured does not imply that others,~~203~~ perhaps larger and potentially more profitable trends,~~956~~ were not missed or ~~$60~~that the Advisors will be able to capture similar trends in the future.08 ~~per~~Moreover, ~~unit~~the ~~for~~fact that the ~~third~~programs ~~quarter~~were profitable ofin ~~2002~~certain market sectors in the past does not mean that they will be so in the future.

~~Performance~~The ~~throughout~~performance summaries are an outline description of how the ~~quarter~~Partnership performed in the past, not ~~was~~necessarily ~~strong~~any indication of how it will perform in the future. ~~Powerful~~Furthermore, the general causes to which certain trends are attributed may or may not in ~~the~~fact have ~~interest~~caused ~~rate~~such ~~sector~~trends, ~~propelled~~as ~~performance~~opposed to simply having occurred at about the same ~~higher~~time. OnWhile ~~September~~there ~~30,~~can ~~2002~~be no assurance that the Advisors will be profitable even in trending markets, ~~JWH~~markets ~~was~~in ~~managing~~which ~~69%~~substantial ofand ~~the~~sustained ~~Partnership’s~~price movements ~~assets~~occur ~~while~~offer ~~Sunrise~~the ~~was~~best ~~managing~~profit ~~31%~~potential offor the Partnership~~’s assets~~.

PartnershipFiscal performanceQuarter was veryended positiveJune in July. The interest rate sector was the performance leader as the downward trend in global interest rates accelerated during the month. Sizable gains were accrued in short-term interest rates denominated in British pounds and Euros. Long positions in the U.S. 5, 10 and 30-year bonds were also very profitable. After several months of positive performance, the currency sector was negative in July. Profits made in long Dollar, short British pound positions were offset by losses incurred in Euro and Japanese yen trading. Aided by accounting scandals and decreased consumer confidence, the world’s stock markets plummeted in July. Hence the Partnership’s short positions in the British and Japan stock indices reaped solid gains. The Partnership’s long positions in the metals sector were hurt when gold prices fell sharply but were rewarded when short positions in industrial metals such as copper and aluminum accrued profits. The Partnership recorded a gain of $2,216,324 or $25.14 per unit in July. 2004

The Partnership ~~made~~recorded ~~new highs for 2002 in August. The economic driver fuelling the gain in the interest rate sector was~~ a ~~weak stock market. Money poured out~~ loss of ~~stocks and into bonds throughout the month. Long positions in short- to long-term bonds denominated in Euro~~$5,630,110 ~~Yen~~or ~~and the U~~$(84.S.06) ~~dollar~~per ~~all~~unit ~~made~~for ~~significant positive contributions. Nearly all positions in~~ the ~~currency~~second ~~sector~~quarter ~~lost~~of ~~money~~2004. ~~The~~On ~~Dollar,~~June ~~which had~~30, ~~lost value to all other major currencies in May and June~~2004, ~~rallied~~JWH ~~sharply.~~was ~~The Japanese~~managing ~~yen~~71% ~~surprised~~of ~~everyone~~the ~~and~~Partnership’s ~~rallied~~assets ~~sharply.~~while ~~Long~~Sunrise ~~positions in crude oil~~was ~~were~~managing ~~profitable~~29% asof ~~its price rose sharply during~~ the ~~month. Gold reversed its downward trend that started in late June which led to a loss in the metals. In the agricultural sector, profits in corn and wheat were offset by losses in soybeans. The~~ Partnership’s ~~recorded a gain of $787,782 or $9~~assets.13 ~~per unit in August.~~

The ~~Partnership~~second ~~closed the~~ quarter ~~with a very positive September. On the strength~~ of ~~rising global bond~~2004 ~~prices,~~produced ~~both~~no ofmeaningful ~~the Partnership’s managers, Sunrise and the JWH, posted solid gains~~trends. In ~~September~~April, the ~~U.S.~~markets ~~economy~~ continued to ~~lead~~focus ~~other~~on ~~industrialized~~growing ~~nations~~expectations inof ahigher global economic slowdown. Subsequently, interest rates denominated in Euros, British pounds, Australian dollars and, most significantly, Japanese yen continued to fall providing positive returns for the Partnership. The most profitable markets in this sector were the U.S. ~~10-year bond,~~interest ~~German bund and British treasury bill~~rates. ~~Long~~Speculation ~~positions~~about in the ~~Euro allowed~~timing ~~for~~and ~~positive~~scope ~~performance~~of in the ~~currency~~possible ~~sector.~~tightening ~~The~~contributed ~~rise~~to inhigh ~~petroleum~~volatility ~~prices~~and major ~~was~~price ~~the~~reversals ~~primary~~particularly ~~driver for positive performance~~ in the ~~energy~~currencies ~~sector.~~and ~~The Partnership~~global ~~recorded~~equity ~~a gain of $2,199,849 or $25~~indices.82 ~~per unit in September.~~

~~During~~The ~~the~~U.S. ~~quarter,~~dollar ~~investors~~strengthened ~~redeemed~~against amost ~~total~~major ofcurrencies ~~3,921~~in response to U.66S. ~~units~~job creation. Consumer Atconfidence and manufacturing activity appear to be waning in Germany, exerting downward pressure on the ~~end~~Euro. Expectations of ~~the~~rising ~~quarter~~rates ~~there~~also sent ~~were~~the ~~84,195.59~~prices ~~units~~of ~~outstanding~~long-term ~~(including~~interest ~~1,891~~rate futures to their lowest levels in several months.61 ~~units~~The ~~owned~~Swiss byfranc and Euro were the ~~General~~best performers while the Japanese yen ~~Partners)~~was the major detractor.

~~During~~Indices ~~the~~were ~~fiscal~~negative ~~quarter~~in ~~ended~~April. ~~September~~More ~~30,~~than ~~2002~~half of the ~~Partnership~~companies ~~had~~in nothe ~~material~~Standard ~~credit~~& ~~exposure~~Poor’s to500 Index areported earnings and 78% of these surpassed analysts’ forecasts. ~~counterparty~~Japanese ~~which~~equity ismarkets awere ~~foreign~~strong ~~commodities~~all ~~exchange~~month while the U.S. and some of the European stock markets faltered later in the month.

~~Fiscal~~A ~~Quarter~~slowing ~~ended~~of ~~June~~the ~~30,~~Chinese economy ~~2003~~and possible decline in the global demand for commodities put downward pressure on prices. Cotton and London sugar had the best performance while wheat had the largest loss.

~~The~~Metals ~~Partnership~~also ~~recorded~~felt athe ~~net~~downward ~~profit~~pressure ofPrecious ~~$1,355,381~~metal orinvestors ~~$16.97~~liquidated ~~per~~long ~~unit~~positions inwhich had been a hedge against the ~~second~~negative ~~quarter~~real rate of ~~2003~~return in the U.S.

~~IDS~~Energies ~~Managed~~were ~~Futures,~~profitable ~~L.P.~~in ~~began~~April. ~~the~~Concerns ~~quarter~~about ~~with~~continued ~~gains~~violence in ~~April~~the ~~and~~Middle aEast ~~strong~~and ~~May~~increased ~~but~~global consumer ~~closed~~demand ~~lower~~helped into ~~June. Overall,~~maintain itprices ~~ended~~at ~~the~~their ~~quarter~~current inlofty ~~positive territory~~levels. OnNatural gas ~~June 30, 2003, JWH~~ was ~~managing~~ ~~73% of~~ the ~~Partnership’s~~only ~~assets~~negative ~~while~~component ~~Sunrise~~in ~~was~~this ~~indirectly managing 27% of the Partnership’s assets~~sector.

~~The~~In ~~Partnership~~May, ~~ended~~a ~~April in~~number ~~positive~~of ~~territory as the swift victory in Iraq impacted markets worldwide.~~factors ~~The~~created ~~currency~~uncertainty ~~sector was primarily responsible for the Partnership’s gain~~ in ~~April.~~ ~~The initial enthusiasm for~~ the ~~U.S.~~financial ~~dollar~~markets in a post-Iraqi war world gave way to bleak fundamentals. The U.S. deficit continued to weigh heavily on the Dollar. Non-Dollar trading had the largest effect on trading profits, specifically, the long Euro/short Yen, long Euro/short British pound, and ~~the long~~prevented ~~Australian~~strong ~~dollar~~trends ~~positions. The interest rate sector was positive largely~~from ~~due to a long position in the Japanese 10-year Government bond~~emerging. The ~~stock~~month ~~index sector~~ was ~~down~~dominated ~~slightly. Most equity markets rallied around the world, encouraged~~ by ~~the~~developments ~~quick end to major conflict~~ in ~~Iraq.~~the ~~Energies were marginally positive in April. The fewer than expected~~ oil field fires in Iraq put considerable downward pressure on the price per barrel. Natural gas rallied most of the month on weather related issues and storage deficits. Contrary to the Partnership’s positionmarket, ~~gold rallied in early April in expectation of the next inflationary cycle~~U. ~~This led to negative performance in the metal sector~~S. ~~Agricultural~~interest ~~products~~rates ~~were~~and ~~slightly profitable for~~ the ~~month.~~possibility ~~In response to the conclusion~~ of ~~the major fighting in the Iraqi war, JWH did resume full leverage in the trading program used for the Partnership effective April 10~~inflation. ~~The decision to reduce exposure to all markets during the Iraqi conflict proved to be beneficial for investors. Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $311,808 or $3.92 per unit in April.~~

The ~~Partnership~~exceptions ~~also posted positive results for the month of May. Currencies were the best performing sector for May due mainly~~ to the ~~weakening of the U.S. dollar. Investments in~~ ~~the~~non-definition ~~fixed income sector~~ were ~~positive for~~ the ~~month~~energy ~~of May, as yields continued to trend lower~~markets. The ~~biggest~~price ~~contributors~~of ~~were~~oil ~~the~~reached ~~Euro~~record ~~Bunds,~~highs ~~U.S. 30-year~~on ~~Bonds,~~continued ~~Japanese~~supply ~~Government~~concerns ~~10-year Bonds,~~ and ~~the~~increased ~~U.S.~~geopolitical ~~10-year Notes~~risk. China’s ~~Stock~~increasing ~~indices~~appetite ~~were negative~~ for ~~May~~petroleum ~~due~~placed ~~primarily~~additional tostrain ~~the~~on ~~poor performance~~available inproduction ~~the~~while ~~Japanese~~Saudi ~~Osaka~~Arabia’s ~~Nikkei~~offer ~~Index. The~~to ~~Nasdaq~~increase ~~E-Mini~~production ~~100~~had ~~Index turned in~~little ~~the~~effect ~~best~~on ~~performance~~stabilizing ~~for~~the ~~this~~price ~~sector. Energies~~of ~~posted negative results in May. All~~ crude ~~and crude-related products were down as a result of the markets rallying due to short supply factors~~oil. ~~The~~ ~~only~~All ~~positive~~components ~~component~~ in this sector ~~was natural gas. Agricultural products~~ were ~~negative for May. The~~ ~~largest~~profitable ~~detractors~~with ~~were~~best ~~corn~~performance ~~and~~coming ~~New~~from ~~York~~London ~~coffee,~~gas ~~while~~oil ~~the largest positive contributor was cotton. Metals were slightly down for May. Losses occurred in copper, silver~~ and ~~aluminum.~~crude ~~Only gold managed to perform in positive territory~~oil. ~~Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $2,585,417 or $33.11 per unit in May.~~

~~Overall,~~Although ~~the Partnership was down in June~~choppy, ~~which started out as a promising month, but turned abruptly negative during~~ the last two weeks. Two trends that were reestablished after the Iraqi War -- a weakening Dollar and falling global interest rates -- reversed course sharply as hints of improving economic times forced the liquidation of large positions in fixed income ~~and currency~~ markets. ~~Currencies~~produced ~~suffered~~positive ~~the largest~~results. ~~sector~~The ~~loss in June, due to the late month strengthening of the~~ U.S. ~~dollar.~~ ~~Stock~~economy ~~indices~~continues ~~were the only sector~~ to ~~register positive returns for the~~show ~~month~~signs of ~~June.~~improvement ~~Fixed~~with ~~income~~fears ~~investments~~of ~~incurred~~rising ~~the~~inflation ~~second largest sector loss for June~~diminishing. The ~~largest~~best results ~~losses~~ were ~~registered~~achieved in the ~~Japanese 10-year Government Bonds,~~ Euro ~~Bunds and the U~~Bund.S. 30-year Bonds. Crude oil was up for the month despite volatile trading. Prices were buoyed by a downshift in OPEC output and the concerns over Tropical Storm Bill hitting the Gulf coast. Overall, however, the energy sector was down for June. The ~~metals~~largest ~~sector~~losses ~~was~~occurred ~~down~~ in ~~June, primarily due to~~ the ~~poor performance of gold. Agricultural products were down~~ ~~for~~Japanese ~~the~~Government ~~month.~~bond ~~All~~and of the ~~other~~Australian ~~parts~~10-year ~~of this group had negligible results~~bond. ~~The Partnership recorded a loss of $1,541,844 or $20.07 per unit in June.~~

~~During~~The ~~the~~currency ~~quarter,~~sector was ~~investors~~negative ~~redeemed~~in aMay. ~~total~~The ~~of 2,822~~U.~~42 units~~S. Atdollar was heavily influenced in the ~~end~~beginning of the month ~~quarter~~by ~~there~~the release of improving economic numbers and revised expectations for ~~were~~continued ~~75,626~~growth in the U.82S. ~~units~~The ~~outstanding~~best ~~(including~~results ~~1,829.41~~from ~~units~~this ~~owned~~sector bywere achieved in the ~~General~~British pound / Japanese yen cross and the Australian dollar. The largest ~~Partners)~~detractors from performance were the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc.

~~During~~The ~~the~~major ~~fiscal~~global ~~quarter~~equity ~~ending~~markets ~~June~~continue ~~30,~~to ~~2003,~~struggle. ~~the~~World ~~Partnership~~GDP ~~had~~continues noat ~~material~~a ~~credit~~strong ~~exposure~~pace; ~~to a counterparty~~however, concerns ~~which~~over isrising ainterest ~~foreign~~rates ~~commodity~~and ~~exchange,~~high orenergy prices have reduced enthusiasm for stocks. This sector failed to register any ~~counterparties dealing~~components in ~~over~~positive territory with the ~~counter~~largest ~~contracts~~loss coming from the Nikkei.

~~Fiscal~~The ~~Quarter~~agricultural ~~ended~~sector ~~June~~was negative ~~30,~~for ~~2002~~May. Coffee prices surged higher due to fears of frost and other weather delays regarding the Brazilian coffee harvest. Live cattle made large gains this month after comments by USDA Secretary Veneman indicated uncertainties surrounding the resumption of Canadian cattle imports to the U.S. New York coffee had the best performance in this sector. Corn and soybeans has the largest losses.

The ~~Partnership~~metals ~~posted~~sector awas ~~gain~~unprofitable ofin ~~$6,898,841~~May. orMetal ~~$76~~prices fell lower for most of the month.22 ~~per~~Base ~~unit~~metals came under pressure due to prospects that China’s demand for raw materials will weaken as its economy slows. This sector failed to register any components in positive territory with the ~~second~~largest ~~quarter~~loss ofcoming ~~2002~~from aluminum.

~~Performance~~Overall, ~~throughout~~ the ~~quarter~~ Partnership was ~~strong.~~negative ~~Powerful~~for ~~trends~~the inmonth ~~the~~of ~~currency~~June. ~~sector~~Financial ~~propelled~~markets ~~performance higher.~~were Onrelatively ~~June~~quiet during ~~30,~~the ~~2002~~month, ~~JWH~~waiting ~~was~~for ~~managing~~a ~~65%~~few ofcritical events scheduled for the ~~Partnership’s~~end ~~assets~~of ~~while~~June: ~~Sunrise~~the ~~was~~long-anticipated ~~indirectly~~first ~~managing~~rate ~~35%~~increase by the Federal Reserve, the handover of power in Iraq, U.S. employment data and the ~~Partnership’s~~continued ~~assets~~slowing of the Chinese economy.

~~The~~While ~~Partnership began~~ the ~~quarter~~ ~~with~~rate ~~slightly~~increase ~~lower performance~~ was in ~~April.~~line ~~Weakness~~with inexpectations, ~~the~~jobless ~~U.S.~~claims ~~dollar provided~~and ~~strong~~manufacturing ~~results~~data inproved ~~the~~to ~~currency sector. Profits were accrued in short~~be ~~Dollar~~slightly ~~positions~~worse ~~against~~than ~~the~~expected ~~Japanese yen, Swiss franc, British pound~~ and ~~Euro. The~~had ~~long~~a ~~Dollar,~~much ~~short~~bigger ~~Euro~~impact ~~position~~on ~~was~~ the ~~Partnership’s~~market ~~most~~than ~~profitable position in April. Performance in~~ the ~~interest~~ rate ~~sector~~hike ~~was very disappointing~~alone. ~~Short~~In ~~positions~~Europe, inGerman ~~Dollar and Euro denominated~~ bond ~~markets~~prices ~~were closed~~rose ~~out~~after asa ~~losses.~~report ~~Profitable~~was ~~long positions in the Japanese government bond~~released ~~market~~showing ~~offset~~that ~~most~~German ofbusiness ~~the~~confidence ~~losses~~had ~~incurred~~dropped ~~by interest rate trading~~unexpectedly. ~~Turmoil in~~Japanese ~~the~~interest ~~Middle~~rates ~~East~~rose ~~lifted~~driving ~~the~~yields ~~energy~~to ~~market~~their ~~higher,~~highest ~~providing~~level ~~small~~in ~~gains~~4 years. The best ~~metals~~performer ~~sector~~ was ~~slightly~~the ~~lower~~3-month asEurodollar ~~gains~~contract ~~in gold could not offset losses in copper, silver~~ and ~~aluminum. Overall~~ the ~~Partnership~~largest ~~recorded~~losses ~~a small loss of~~were ~~$48,699~~Japanese orGovernment ~~$0.52~~bond ~~per~~and ~~unit~~Euro ~~in April~~Bund.

The ~~currency~~foreign ~~sector~~exchange ~~paved~~sector ~~the~~was ~~way~~negative for ~~strong performance in May~~June. The U.S. dollar ~~continued~~was toessentially ~~weaken against most major currencies~~flat, ~~most~~ending ~~notably~~ the ~~Euro, the Japanese yen and the~~month ~~Swiss~~with ~~franc,~~little ~~providing strong profits~~change. ~~Trends~~The inJapanese ~~the~~yen ~~currency~~strengthened ~~markets~~against ~~were~~most ~~aided by~~currencies ~~the U.S. Treasury’s “stand aside” approach~~ on ~~the Dollar~~ ~~policy~~prospects ~~and the Bank~~ of ~~Japan’s failed intervention attempts. The Australian dollar~~ continued toeconomic ~~rise as the currency linked to physical commodities, due to expectation of higher global inflation~~expansion. ~~The~~Minor ~~Partnership’s~~currencies ~~long~~were ~~Euro~~mixed ~~versus~~against ~~short Japanese yen position was also profitable. The stock index sector registered modest gains during May, primarily due to~~ the ~~German DAX. The steepening~~ U.S. ~~yield~~dollar. ~~curve~~Profits ~~allowed~~were ~~long~~generated ~~positions~~ in ~~the~~Australian 2dollar, 5Swiss ~~and~~franc ~~10 year bonds~~and toJapanese ~~accrue~~yen ~~profits~~options. The ~~Japanese government bond provided the~~ largest ~~profit~~losses ~~as it continued to climb. Losses~~ were ~~absorbed~~from in the ~~Australian~~Japanese ~~and~~yen ~~European interest rate markets. The metals sector was also positive for the month. Profits in long gold positions more than offset losses in industrial~~ and ~~base~~ ~~metals.~~Euro/British ~~All~~pound ~~in all, the Partnership recorded a gain of $1,990,163 or $21~~cross.72 ~~per unit in May.~~

~~The~~Stock ~~Partnership~~indices ~~followed May’s~~were ~~gain with an extremely~~ positive for June. ~~The~~Major ~~economic~~stock ~~drivers~~markets ~~that fueled~~continued ~~the~~to ~~strong~~climb ~~performance~~higher ~~included~~after atheir ~~confluence~~slide ~~of events influencing the~~in ~~currency sector~~mid-May, ~~which~~although ~~was~~single-digit ~~the~~earnings ~~strongest~~growth ~~performing~~in ~~sector~~major ~~due~~markets, to the ~~recent weakness~~high ~~of the Dollar. The Euro gained approximately 15% on the Dollar for the~~cost ~~year-to-date. Investors selling U.S. stocks due to fear~~ of ~~additional~~energy ~~accounting abnormalities~~and ~~put pressure on stocks as well as~~ the ~~Dollar.~~anticipation ~~Much~~ of ~~the~~rising ~~proceeds of~~interest ~~these~~rates ~~sales~~dampened ~~appeared to have moved into non-Dollar investments along with global bonds and gold~~enthusiasm. The best ~~global~~return ~~bond~~came ~~market rallied as a result of money coming~~ from ~~sales~~Australian ofSPI ~~equities.~~200 ~~This “flight to quality” helped the Partnership’s long positions in the European, Japanese~~ and ~~U.S. bond markets to appreciate throughout~~ the ~~month.~~largest ~~Short~~loss ~~positions~~was in the ~~world’s~~ ~~stock~~Eurostoxx ~~markets via stock index futures were positive contributors in June~~50. ~~Corn and soybeans prices gained over 15% since lows were made in May. For June, the Partnership recorded a gain of $4,957,377 or $55.02 per unit.~~

~~During~~The ~~the~~energy ~~quarter,~~sector was ~~investors~~negative ~~redeemed~~for aJune. ~~total~~These ofmarkets ~~5,772.71~~continue ~~units~~to be volatile with a bias upward. Crude Atoil ~~the~~and ~~end~~related prices remain robust as a result of the ~~quarter~~strong ~~there~~growth in ~~were~~the ~~86,225~~U.65S. ~~units~~and ~~outstanding~~China ~~(including~~and ~~1,938~~continuing tensions in the Middle East.83 ~~units~~The ~~owned~~best performer bywas London gas oil and the ~~General~~largest losses came from Nymex crude oil ~~Partners)~~and natural gas.

~~During~~The ~~the~~agricultural ~~fiscal~~sector ~~quarter~~was ~~ended~~negative for June. ~~30,~~Decreased ~~2002,~~demand from China put downward pressure on the grains. ~~Partnership~~Coffee ~~had~~felt nothe ~~material~~weight ~~credit~~of ~~exposure~~increased toproduction ain Brazil. The price of ~~counterparty~~cotton ~~which~~moved islower aanticipating ~~foreign~~increased ~~commodities~~plantings ~~exchange~~in other countries. Cotton gave the best return and New York coffee and soybeans were the largest losses.

~~Fiscal~~The ~~Quarter~~metals ~~ended~~sector ~~March~~was positive 31this month. The price of gold and silver fell at the beginning of the month against a strengthening U.S. dollar, ~~2003~~with gold being buoyed again by the weakening U.S. dollar toward month end. Base metals initially moved lower anticipating decreased demand from China however low levels of global inventories pushed prices higher by month end. The best performer was silver and the largest losses came from aluminum and gold.

~~The~~During ~~Partnership~~the ~~recorded~~quarter, investors redeemed a ~~net~~ ~~profit~~total of $32,~~325,047~~518.59 ~~or $40~~units.43 ~~per~~At ~~unit in~~ the ~~first~~end ~~quarter~~ of ~~2003.~~the Asquarter ofthere ~~March~~were 3164,771.77 ~~the~~units ~~Partnership~~outstanding ~~has~~(including ~~gained 10~~1,829.~~78%~~41 ~~for~~units ~~the~~owned ~~first~~by ~~quarter~~the General Partners).

InDuring ~~January,~~ the ~~currency sector~~fiscal ~~supplied most of the month’s gain. Non-Dollar trading had the~~quarter ~~largest~~ended ~~effect~~June ~~on performance. The Partnership’s long Euro~~30, ~~short~~2004 ~~Yen position was~~ the most profitable position in this sector capitalizing on the very slow growth rate of Japan. Additional gains were made in the long U.S. dollar, short Yen position as well as the Swiss franc. The steady slowing of the world’s economies fueled the decline of worldwide interest rates. Positions denominated in Euro and Yen were the most profitable. Gains were also posted in the British and U.S. markets. The energy portfolio of the Partnership ~~was positive~~had ~~despite~~no amaterial ~~small~~credit ~~allocation~~exposure to ~~this sector. The uncertainty of the Middle East cast~~ a ~~dark shadow over all markets. The remainder of the market~~ ~~sectors~~counterparty ~~traded~~which ~~had~~is ~~little impact on performance. Overall, the Partnership recorded~~ a ~~gain~~foreign ofcommodities ~~$3,319,302 or $40~~exchange.50 ~~per unit in January.~~

TheFiscal PartnershipQuarter continued itsended positiveJune performance in February. The impending war with Iraq, slowing global economies, a weaker U.S. dollar and higher energy prices became a recurring theme in the quarter. The currency sector was unchanged in February. The long Euro, short British pound position had the best return of the sector. The Australian dollar and the Swiss franc also performed well. The Japanese yen and the British pound suffered the largest losses due to the sharp reversal from January’s rally. All geographic components of the interest rate sector posted positive results as money market and bond yields worldwide continued to move lower. Notable returns were achieved in the Euro Bund, the U.S. 30-year and 10-year bonds and the Japanese Government bond. The energy sector was the second-best performing sector for the month. The highest returns came from London gas oil and NYMEX natural gas. Gold prices dropped $40 after the German Bundesbank announced that it had sold a portion of its gold reserves. This was the primary reason for negative performance from this sector. Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $1,497,771 or $18.49 per unit in February. 2003

The Partnership ~~closed lower~~recorded ~~in March as the war in Iraq created volatile moves in the world’s financial and commodity markets. Nearly all markets traded in the interest rate sector were negative as~~ a ~~whipsaw action in the U.S. dollar and interest rates~~net ~~led~~profit ~~to losses. This was due to disappointing news in the progress~~ of the war in Iraq. The nearly 35% rise in crude oil since mid-December was erased in just over one week’s time immediately before the start of the war. This caused negative performance in the energy sector. The metal and agricultural sectors had little impact on performance. The stock index sector was the only positive performer for the month. The Partnership recorded a loss of $1,~~492~~355,~~026~~381 or $1816.56 97 per unit in ~~March~~the second quarter of 2003.

InIDS ~~early~~Managed ~~March~~Futures, ~~out~~L.P. began ofthe quarter with gains in April and a strong May but closed lower in June. ~~concern~~Overall, ~~for~~it ~~heightened~~ended ~~volatility~~the quarter in ~~global~~positive ~~markets~~territory. On June 30, 2003, JWH ~~reduced~~was managing 73% of the Partnership’s ~~exposure~~assets towhile ~~all~~Sunrise ~~markets~~was ~~traded~~indirectly managing ~~but~~27% ~~continued~~of tothe ~~follow~~Partnership’s ~~its disciplined trading approach~~assets.

~~During~~The Partnership ended April in positive territory as the ~~quarter,~~swift victory in Iraq impacted markets worldwide. ~~investors~~The ~~redeemed~~currency sector was primarily responsible for the Partnership’s gain in April. The initial enthusiasm for the U.S. dollar in a ~~total~~post-Iraqi ofwar 2world gave way to bleak fundamentals. The U.S. deficit continued to weigh heavily on the Dollar. Non-Dollar trading had the largest effect on trading profits,~~494~~ specifically, the long Euro/short Yen, long Euro/short British pound, and the long Australian dollar positions.63 ~~units~~The interest rate sector was positive largely due to a long position in the Japanese 10-year Government bond. AtThe stock index position was down slightly. Most equity markets rallied around the world, encouraged by the quick end to major conflict in Iraq. Energies were marginally positive in April. The fewer than expected oil field fires in Iraq put considerable downward pressure on the price per barrel. Natural gas rallied most of the ~~quarter~~month ~~there~~on weather related issues and storage deficits. Contrary to the ~~were~~Partnership’s 79position,~~449~~ gold rallied in early April in expectation of the next inflationary cycle.25 ~~units~~This ~~outstanding~~led ~~(including~~to 1negative performance in the metal sector. Agricultural products were slightly profitable for the month. In response to the conclusion of the major fighting in the Iraqi war,~~829~~ JWH did resume full leverage in the trading program effective April 10.41 ~~units~~The ~~owned~~decision byto reduce exposure to all markets during the ~~General~~Iraqi conflict proved to be beneficial for investors. ~~Partners)~~Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $311,808 or $3.92 per unit in April.

~~During~~The Partnership also posted positive results for the ~~fiscal~~month ~~quarter~~of May. Currencies were the best performing ~~ended~~sector ~~March~~for 31May due mainly to the weakening of the U.S. dollar. Investments in the fixed income sector were positive for the month of May, ~~2003~~as yields continued to trend lower. The biggest contributors were the Euro Bunds, U.S. 30-year Bonds, Japanese Government 10-year Bonds, and the ~~Partnership~~U.S. ~~had~~10-year noNotes. Stock ~~material~~indices ~~credit~~were ~~exposure~~negative for May due primarily to the poor performance in the Japanese Osaka Nikkei Index. The Nasdaq E-Mini 100 Index turned in the best performance for this sector. Energies posted negative results in May. All crude and crude-related products were down as a result of the ~~counterparty~~markets ~~which~~rallying isdue to short supply factors. The only positive component in this sector was natural gas. Agricultural products were negative for May. The largest detractors were corn and New York coffee, while the largest positive contributor was cotton. Metals were slightly down for May. Losses occurred in copper, silver and aluminum. Only gold managed to perform in positive territory. Overall, the Partnership recorded a ~~foreign~~gain ~~commodities~~of ~~exchange~~$2,585,417 or $33.11 per unit in May.

~~Fiscal~~Overall, ~~Quarter~~the ~~ended~~Partnership was ~~March~~down 31in June, ~~2002~~which started out as a promising month, but turned abruptly negative during the last two weeks. Two trends that were reestablished after the Iraqi War -- a weakening Dollar and falling global interest rates -- reversed course sharply as hints of improving economic times forced the liquidation of large positions in fixed income and currency markets. Currencies suffered the largest sector loss in June, due to the late month strengthening of the U.S. dollar. Stock indices were the only sector to register positive returns for the month of June. Fixed income investments incurred the second largest sector loss for June. The largest losses were registered in the Japanese 10-year Government Bonds, Euro Bunds and the U.S. 30-year bonds. Crude oil was up for the month despite volatile trading. Prices were buoyed by a downshift in OPEC output and the concerns over Tropical Storm Bill hitting the Gulf coast. Overall, however, the energy sector was down for June. The metals sector was down in June, primarily due to the poor performance of gold. Agricultural products were down for the month. All of the other parts of this group had negligible results. The Partnership recorded a loss of $1,541,844 or $20.07 per unit in June.

~~The~~During ~~Partnership~~the ~~recorded~~quarter, investors redeemed a ~~loss~~ total of $23,~~570,421~~822.42 ~~or $26~~units.67 ~~per~~At ~~unit~~the ~~for~~end of the ~~first~~ quarter ofthere were ~~2002~~75,626.82 units outstanding (including 1,829.41 units owned by the General Partners).

~~Performance~~During ~~throughout~~ the fiscal quarter ~~was~~ending ~~disappointing.~~June ~~Volatile~~30, ~~Japanese~~2003, ~~markets were~~ the ~~primary~~Partnership ~~source~~had ~~of performance~~no ~~problems.~~material Oncredit ~~March~~exposure ~~30,~~to ~~2002~~a counterparty, ~~JWH~~which ~~was~~is ~~managing~~a ~~60%~~foreign ofcommodity ~~the Partnership’s~~exchange, ~~assets~~or ~~while~~to ~~Sunrise~~any ~~was~~counterparties dealing ~~indirectly~~in ~~managing~~over ~~40% of~~ the ~~Partnership’s~~ ~~assets~~counter contracts.

InFiscal January,Quarter performanceended was positiveMarch in the currency and energy sectors while interest rate31, metal, stock index and commodity markets posted losses. The most significant gains came from the currency sector where the Japanese yen continued to lose value. This was beneficial to the Partnership because the short Yen position was the largest in the portfolio. Trading in all other currency markets was negative. The Enron news created a “flight to quality” situation which led to higher U.S. and European bond prices. These news items and others ceased the selling activity in global bonds and caused losses in the Partnership’s long positions. Profitable short positions in Japanese Government bonds were not large enough to make interest rate trading profitable. The energy sector posted a very small gain as short positions in natural gas exceeded losses taken in all other energy markets. Overall, the Partnership recorded a loss of $286,930 or $2.93 per unit in January. 2004

~~During~~The ~~February, fluctuating~~Partnership ~~price~~recorded ~~patterns continued which led to~~ a ~~difficult month for the~~profit Partnership. The key element in performance was the trend reversals in the Japanese financial markets. The Nikkei (stock index), Japanese Government bonds and the Yen accounted for approximately one half of ~~the losses in the portfolio. Losses in the currency sector also occurred in the British pound~~$1, ~~Swiss franc and Euro. As mentioned above~~287,982 ~~trading~~or ~~in Japanese Government bonds was negative~~$18. ~~Further~~40 ~~losses~~per inunit ~~the~~for ~~interest rate sector occurred in U.S. bond trading. Trading in European bonds was negative as well. Open trade profits accrued in short term interest rates helped offset some of~~ the ~~losses~~first ~~incurred~~quarter ~~by the balance~~ of ~~the sector~~2004. Performance throughout in the ~~energy~~quarter ~~sector~~ was ~~also unprofitable~~strong. ~~Short~~ ~~positions~~On inMarch ~~crude~~31, ~~oil~~2004, ~~natural~~JWH ~~gas~~was ~~and~~managing ~~gasoline~~72% ~~suffered as prices rose~~of ~~throughout~~ the ~~sector.~~Partnership’s ~~Gold~~assets ~~prices~~while ~~continued~~Sunrise towas ~~rise,~~managing ~~which~~28% ~~allowed~~of the Partnership’s ~~long positions to accrue profits~~assets. ~~The Partnership recorded a loss of $1,339,565 or $13.86 per unit in February.~~

~~March~~Although ~~was~~the ~~another~~markets were ~~disappointing~~volatile, ~~month. Positive returns from~~ the ~~energy~~Partnership ~~and~~was ~~interest~~positive ~~rate~~in ~~sectors were~~January ~~overpowered~~with bymany ~~losses~~of in the ~~currency~~long-term trends ~~sector.~~remaining ~~Currencies,~~intact ~~particularly~~during the ~~Yen,~~ ~~were~~month. ~~hit~~The ~~hard~~declining ~~during March~~U.S. ~~Japanese~~dollar ~~corporations~~continued against ~~spurred~~most amajor ~~rally~~currencies induring the ~~Yen~~ ~~when~~first ~~they~~half ~~actively~~of ~~repatriated~~the ~~Yen for year-end accounting purposes~~month. ~~This~~Following ~~proved~~comments tomade beboth ~~detrimental~~by ~~for~~ the ~~Partnership’s~~Federal ~~short~~Reserve ~~Yen~~Board ~~position.~~regarding ~~The~~possible ~~U.S.~~interest rate ~~dollar~~increases ~~traded~~and inthe aEuropean ~~sideways~~Central ~~pattern~~Bank ~~against~~alluding ~~the~~to ~~British~~possible ~~pound,~~intervention ~~Swiss~~in ~~franc and~~the ~~Euro~~currency markets, ~~resulting~~the ~~in additional losses~~U.S. ~~The~~dollar ~~energy~~strengthened ~~and~~significantly ~~interest~~against ~~rate sectors~~most ~~turned~~currencies. inThe along ~~positive~~Japanese ~~performance.~~yen ~~Profits~~and ~~accrued~~British inpound ~~short~~ positions inmade ~~Euro denominated markets out weighed losses in~~ the ~~Japanese~~greatest contribution ~~bond~~to ~~market~~profits. ~~For~~This ~~the month,~~sector was the ~~Partnership~~best ~~recorded~~performer aduring ~~loss of $943,926 or $9~~January.87 ~~per unit in March.~~

~~During~~Base ~~the~~metals ~~quarter,~~continued to ~~investors~~perform ~~redeemed~~well aas ~~total~~prices ofescalated ~~3,699.64~~due ~~units.~~to At the ~~end~~strong ofdemand ~~the~~from ~~quarter there were 93,937~~China.18 ~~units outstanding (including 1~~Copper,~~938.83~~ aluminum ~~units~~and ~~owned~~silver bywere ~~the General Partners)~~profitable.

~~During~~Because ~~the~~of ~~fiscal~~an ~~quarter~~unusually ~~ended~~high ~~March~~level 30of weather-related demand, ~~2002~~tight U.S. inventories, and OPEC agreeing to cut production, crude oil was one of the ~~Partnership~~most ~~had~~profitable nomarkets ~~material~~in ~~credit~~February. The ~~exposure~~fixed toincome sector was also a top performer. Interest rates continued to ~~counterparty~~move ~~which~~lower isin athe ~~foreign~~U.S., ~~commodities~~Europe, ~~exchange~~and Asia as inflation remained low in all three regions. The most profitable positions were Euro bunds, Japanese 10-year bond, and the U.S. 10-year notes and 30-year bonds.

~~Item~~Despite 3a high level of volatility, the currency sector was also profitable for the month. ~~Quantitative~~The ~~and~~U.S. dollar ~~Qualitative~~began ~~Disclosures~~to ~~About~~make ~~Market~~an ~~Risk~~upside breakout due to speculation that the Federal Reserve would raise interest rates if the U.S. economy continued to improve. The best performing positions were: Euro/Pound cross, long positions in British pounds versus Japanese yen, the Euro and the Swiss franc.

~~There~~The ~~has~~metals ~~been~~sector ~~no material~~also ~~change~~contributed to profitability with ~~respect~~copper toleading ~~market~~the ~~risk~~way ~~since~~followed ~~the~~by ~~“Quantitative~~silver and ~~Qualitative~~ ~~Disclosures~~aluminum. ~~About~~All ~~Market~~were ~~Risk”~~driven ~~was~~by ~~made~~strong indemand, ~~the~~dollar ~~Form~~weakness ~~10-K~~and ~~of the Partnership~~declining ~~dated December 31, 2002~~inventories.

~~Item~~The 4.supply ~~Controls~~situation was favorable for grains as well with unusually tight inventories sending corn and bean ~~Internal~~prices ~~Procedures~~to new contract highs.

~~Under~~March ~~the~~was ~~supervision~~a ~~and~~particularly ~~with~~challenging ~~the participation of the management of CIS Investments, Inc~~month., aTerrorist ~~General Partner~~activities ofin ~~the~~Spain ~~Partnership, including CISI’s President~~ and ~~Chief~~heightened ~~Financial Officer,~~tensions ~~the~~in ~~Partnership has evaluated~~ the ~~effectiveness of the design and~~ ~~operation~~Middle ofEast ~~its~~kept ~~disclosure~~those ~~controls~~looking ~~and~~for ~~procedures~~investment asopportunities ofon the ~~filing~~sideline. ~~date of~~The ~~this~~agricultural ~~quarterly~~sector ~~report,~~was ~~and,~~the ~~based~~best onperformer ~~their~~for ~~evaluation,~~ the ~~President~~month ~~and~~led ~~Chief Financial~~by ~~Officer~~grains, ofwhose prices ~~CISI’s~~rose ~~have~~based ~~concluded~~on ~~that~~a ~~these~~surge ~~disclosure~~in ~~controls and~~export ~~procedures~~demand, ~~are~~followed ~~effective.~~by ~~There~~a ~~were~~drop ~~no significant changes~~ in ~~the~~cotton ~~Partnership’s~~prices ~~internal~~based ~~controls~~on orUSDA inreports ~~other factors~~ that ~~could~~sales ~~materially affect~~are ~~these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation~~slowing.

In precious metals both gold and silver extended their gains as demand continued to rise and despite the U.S. dollar strengthening. Silver was the best performer overall, reaching a 17 year high of $8.30 an ounce. Base metals experienced a period of consolidation and remained within a road and volatile trading range as the market weighed information that China’s appetite may be waning.

Geopolitical risk and OPEC’s production cut helped crude oil and related products retain lofty price levels. Natural gas had the highest gain for the sector followed by crude oil.

The unprofitable currency sector was dominated by the action in the Japanese yen, orchestrated by the Bank of Japan which intervened in the foreign exchange market by buying over $40 billion U.S. dollars/selling Japanese yen. Most other currencies traded in a sideways fashion in varying degrees of volatility.

During the quarter, investors redeemed a total of 2,570.53 units. At the end of the quarter there were 67,290.34 units outstanding (including 1,829.41 units owned by the General Partners).

During the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004 the Partnership had no material credit exposure to a counterparty which is a foreign commodities exchange.

Fiscal Quarter ended March 31, 2003

The Partnership recorded a net profit of $3,325,047 or $40.43 per unit in the first quarter of 2003. As of March 31, the Partnership had gained 10.78% for the first quarter.

In January, the currency sector supplied most of the month’s gain. Non-Dollar trading had the largest effect on performance. The Partnership’s long Euro, short Yen position was the most profitable position in this sector capitalizing on the very slow growth rate of Japan. Additional gains were made in the long U.S. dollar, short Yen position as well as the Swiss franc. The steady slowing of the world’s economies fueled the decline of worldwide interest rates. Positions denominated in Euro and Yen were the most profitable. Gains were also posted in the British and U.S. markets. The energy portfolio of the Partnership was positive despite a small allocation to this sector. The uncertainty of the Middle East cast a dark shadow over all markets. The remainder of the market sectors traded had little impact on performance. Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $3,319,302 or $40.50 per unit in January.

The Partnership continued its positive performance in February. The impending war with Iraq, slowing global economies, a weaker U.S. dollar and higher energy prices became a recurring theme in the quarter. The currency sector was unchanged in February. The long Euro, short British pound position had the best return of the sector. The Australian dollar and the Swiss franc also performed well. The Japanese yen and the British pound suffered the largest losses due to the sharp reversal from January’s rally. All geographic components of the interest rate sector posted positive results as money market and bond yields worldwide continued to move lower. Notable returns were achieved in the Euro Bund, the U.S. 30-year and 10-year bonds and the Japanese Government bond. The energy sector was the second-best performing sector for the month. The highest returns came from London gas oil and NYMEX natural gas. Gold prices dropped $40 after the German Bundesbank announced that it had sold a portion of its gold reserves. This was the primary reason for negative performance from this sector. Overall, the Partnership recorded a gain of $1,497,771 or $18.49 per unit in February.

The Partnership closed lower in March as the war in Iraq created volatile moves in the world’s financial and commodity markets. Nearly all markets traded in the interest rate sector were negative as a whipsaw action in the U.S. dollar and interest rates led to losses. This was due to disappointing news in the progress of the war in Iraq. The nearly 35% rise in crude oil since mid-December was erased in just over one week’s time immediately before the start of the war. This caused negative performance in the energy sector. The metal and agricultural sectors had little impact on performance. The stock index sector was the only positive performer for the month. The Partnership recorded a loss of $1,492,026 or $18.56 per unit in March.

In early March, out of concern for heightened volatility in global markets, JWH reduced the Partnership’s exposure to all markets traded but continued to follow its disciplined trading approach.

During the quarter, investors redeemed a total of 2,494.63 units. At the end of the quarter there were 79,449.25 units outstanding (including 1,829.41 units owned by the General Partners).

During the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2003, the Partnership had no material credit exposure to a counterparty which is a foreign commodities exchange.

(d) Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements; Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

There have been no material changes with respect to the Partnership’s off-balance-sheet arrangements (as defined in Regulation S-K 303(a)(4)(ii)) or disclosures of contractual obligations as reported in the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal year 2003.

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

There has been no material change with respect to market risk since the “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” was made in the Form 10-K of the Partnership dated December 31, 2003.

Item 4. 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, the Partnership has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures as of the filing date of this quarterly report, 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 over financial reporting or in other factors that could materially affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.

PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

The Partnership and its affiliates are from time to time parties to various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. The General Partners believe that there is no proceeding threatened or pending against the Partnership or any of its affiliates which, if determined adversely, would have a material adverse effect on on the financial condition or results of operations of the Partnership.

Item 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds

Item 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds
	a)	None
	b)	None
	c)	None
	d)	None
	e)	The Partnership permits Limited Partners to redeem units at the end of each month at the Net Asset Value per unit on the redemption date. The redemption of units has no impact on the net asset value of the units that remain outstanding and units may not be reissued once they are redeemed.

~~None~~The following table summarizes the redemptions by unitholders during the second quarter of 2004:

Month	Units Redeemed	Redemption Date NAV per Unit
April	413.04	$ 418.71
May	547.76	$ 397.95
June	1,557.79	$ 379.16
Total	2,518.59

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

None

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

None

Item 5. Other Information

a) None

b) None

Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K

	a)	Exhibits
	ExhibitNumber	Description of Document
	3.1	Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement.
	10.1	Advisory Contract dated as of March 27, 1987 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P., John W. Henry & Company, Inc. and Sabre Fund Management Limited.
	10.2	Amended Advisory Contracts dated January 23, 1992 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P. and each of John W. Henry & Company, Inc. and Sabre Fund Management Limited.
	10.3	Amended Advisory Contract dated April 30, 1996 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P., John W. Henry & Company, Inc. and Sabre Fund Management Limited.
	10.4	Advisory Contract dated as of July 2, 1997 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P. and Welton Investment Corporation ~~(Incorporated by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No~~. ~~3 to the Registration Statement as filed by the Partnership on July 31, 1997).~~
	10.5	Amendment to Advisory Contract dated September 29, 2000 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P. and John W. Henry & Company, Inc.
	10.6	Amendment to Advisory Contract dated September 29, 2000 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P. and Welton Investment Corporation.
	10.7	~~Ammended~~Amended and Restated Advisory Contract dated December 29, 2000 between CIS Investments, Inc., IDS Futures Corporation, IDS Managed Futures, L.P. and Welton Investment Corporation.
	31.01	Rule 13a-14(a)/~~13d~~15d-14(a) Certifications of Principal Executive Officer
	31.02	Rule 13a-14(a)/~~13d~~15d-14(a) Certifications of Principal Financial Officer
	32.01	Section 1350 Certification
Note:	Exhibits 3.1, 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3 are incorporated by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement as filed by the Partnership on June 7, 1996.
Note:	Exhibit 10.4 is incorporated by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No. 3 to the Registration Statement as filed by the Partnership on July 31, 1997.
Note:	Exhibits 10.5, 10.6 and 10.7 are incorporated by reference to Form 10-K by the Partnership on March 26, 2001.
	b)	Reports on Form 8-K
		None

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned and thereunto duly authorized.

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P.

Date: ~~November~~August 1213, ~~2003~~2004

By: CIS Investments, Inc., One of its General Partners By: /s/ Shaun D. O'Brien Shaun D. O'Brien ~~Vice President,~~ Chief Financial Officer ~~and Director~~

(Duly authorized officer of the General Partner and the Principal Financial Officer of the General Partner)

EXHIBIT INDEX

	ExhibitNumber		Description of Document
	31.01		Rule 13a-14(a)/13d-14(a) Certifications of Principal Executive Officer
	31.02		Rule 13a-14(a)/13d-14(a) Certifications of Principal Financial Officer
	32.01		Section 1350 Certification

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

FORM 10-Q

For the quarterly period ended SeptemberJune 30, 20032004 Commission File Number: 0-16515

PART I1 –- FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (unaudited)

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (unaudited)

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS June 30, 2004

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P. STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN UNITHOLDERS' CAPITAL From January (1,) 2003General throughInformation Septemberand 30, 2003 (unaudited)Summary

(12) GeneralSummary Informationof andSignificant SummaryAccounting Policies

RedemptionsForeign Currency Transactions

CommissionsUse of Estimates

Foreign(3) Currency TransactionsFees

(34) FeesIncome Taxes

(7) Investments in Other Commodity Pools

In December 2001, the Partnership invested in another commodity pool, IDS Managed Fund LLC (IDSMF7). The investmentFinancial is subject to the terms of the respective advisory contract and other agreements of this commodity pool. Highlights

(8)Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial HighlightsCondition and Results of Operations

Fiscal(b) Quarter ended September 30, 2003Liquidity

Fiscal Quarter ended March 31, 2003

(d) Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements; Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

Item 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

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

Item 5. Other Information

Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K

SIGNATURES

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P.

EXHIBIT INDEX

IDS MANAGED FUTURES, L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 2004

Filing Compare · IDS MANAGED FUTURES L P