AMNA vs. CEFD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AMNA (ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN) and CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - AMNA is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Both are passively managed. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMNA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for CEFD.

Performance

AMNA vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN (AMNA) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

AMNA

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CEFD

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 3.13%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMNA vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AMNA ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN	0.00%	0.00%	44.30%	12.50%	20.41%	36.44%	2.88%
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	6.26%	14.15%	20.06%	8.36%	-28.93%	22.09%	21.37%

Correlation

The correlation between AMNA and CEFD is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2020	0.44

The correlation between AMNA and CEFD shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (3 years) to 0.44 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

AMNA vs. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AMNA vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN (AMNA) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AMNA	CEFD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.18	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.52	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	AMNA	CEFD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-36.95%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-12.51%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.95%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-1.14%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-11.72%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.68%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AMNA	CEFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.05%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.27%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	12.86%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	17.93%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	17.31%	—

AMNA vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMNA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMNA vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison

AMNA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AMNA ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN	0.00%	0.00%	4.32%	5.61%	5.48%	5.84%	2.12%
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.58%	14.88%	13.90%	14.76%	16.56%	10.31%	5.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMNA and CEFD in my portfolio?

AMNA and CEFD have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AMNA or CEFD?

On fees, AMNA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMNA or CEFD?

AMNA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for CEFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMNA or CEFD?

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for AMNA.

What is the main difference between AMNA and CEFD?

AMNA tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%). Their fees differ too: 0.75% for AMNA and 0.95% for CEFD.