We argue that Causal Decision Theory (CDT) is no worse off than Evidential Decision Theory (EDT) in handling entanglement, regardless of one’s preferred interpretation of quantum mechanics. In recent works, Ahmed (2014) and Ahmed and Caulton (2014) have claimed the opposite; we argue that they are mistaken. Bell-type experiments are not instances of Newcomb problems, so CDT and EDT do not diverge in their recommendations. We highlight the fact that a Causal Decision Theorist should take all lawlike correlations into account, including potentially acausal entanglement correlations. This paper also provides a brief introduction to CDT with a motivating “small” Newcomb problem. The main point of our argument is that quantum theory does not provide grounds for favouring EDT over CDT
