AMUB vs. MLPA
AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) and MLPA (Global X MLP ETF) are both MLPs funds - AMUB tracks the Alerian MLP Index while MLPA tracks the Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AMUB returned 2.59%/yr vs 5.85%/yr for MLPA. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMUB charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for MLPA.
Performance
AMUB vs. MLPA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with AMUB having a 11.87% return and MLPA slightly higher at 12.27%. Over the past 10 years, AMUB has underperformed MLPA with an annualized return of 2.59%, while MLPA has yielded a comparatively higher 5.85% annualized return.
AMUB
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- -9.67%
- YTD
- 11.87%
- 6M
- 11.94%
- 1Y
- 10.22%
- 3Y*
- 14.71%
- 5Y*
- 11.11%
- 10Y*
- 2.59%
MLPA
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- -6.12%
- YTD
- 12.27%
- 6M
- 12.23%
- 1Y
- 12.25%
- 3Y*
- 16.25%
- 5Y*
- 14.32%
- 10Y*
- 5.85%
AMUB vs. MLPA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 11.87% | 2.05% | 15.68% | 16.89% | 21.91% | 28.83% | -36.47% | -1.78% | -19.25% | -13.07% |
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 12.27% | 5.73% | 20.35% | 15.93% | 27.03% | 39.64% | -33.97% | 11.91% | -15.71% | -8.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMUB and MLPA is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2015 | 0.75 |
The correlation between AMUB and MLPA shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (all time) to 0.93 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AMUB vs. MLPA — Risk / Return Rank
AMUB
MLPA
AMUB vs. MLPA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) and Global X MLP ETF (MLPA). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| AMUB | MLPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.17 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.96 | 1.48 | -0.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.64 | 4.18 | -1.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMUB vs. MLPA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMUB drawdown since its inception was -79.46%, roughly equal to the maximum MLPA drawdown of -78.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUB and MLPA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMUB | MLPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.46% | -78.75% | -0.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.69% | -8.33% | -2.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.22% | -14.20% | -3.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.58% | -18.75% | -1.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.86% | -74.05% | -4.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.25% | -6.99% | -3.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.12% | -20.22% | -8.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 2.94% | +0.95% |
Volatility
AMUB vs. MLPA - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) has a higher volatility of 4.72% compared to Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) at 4.18%. This indicates that AMUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MLPA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMUB | MLPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.72% | 4.18% | +0.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.95% | 8.61% | +1.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.75% | 12.04% | +1.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.11% | 18.06% | +2.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.12% | 27.45% | -0.33% |
AMUB vs. MLPA - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMUB has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than MLPA's 0.77% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMUB vs. MLPA - Dividend Comparison
AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MLPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.52%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 7.52% | 7.82% | 7.25% | 7.49% | 7.30% | 8.72% | 13.84% | 9.09% | 10.00% | 8.05% | 7.15% | 9.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, AMUB and MLPA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
AMUB has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to MLPA (4.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMUB dropped -79.46% vs MLPA's -78.75%.
On 10-year performance, MLPA leads with 5.85% vs 2.59% for AMUB. On fees, MLPA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, MLPA has been the lower-risk option at 4.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MLPA has performed better with a 5.85% return vs 2.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MLPA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for AMUB.
MLPA has the higher dividend yield at 7.52%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.
AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index, while MLPA tracks Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for AMUB and 0.77% for MLPA.
MLPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs 0.75), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for AMUB and MLPA
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer