AMUB vs. MLPI
AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) and MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both MLPs funds. AMUB is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMUB charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
AMUB vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMUB achieves a 18.96% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 20.53% return.
AMUB
- 1D
- 2.18%
- 1M
- 2.62%
- 6M
- 15.37%
- YTD
- 18.96%
- 1Y
- 17.43%
- 3Y*
- 15.30%
- 5Y*
- 13.69%
- 10Y*
- 3.23%
MLPI
- 1D
- 1.17%
- 1M
- 1.14%
- 6M
- 21.89%
- YTD
- 20.53%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AMUB vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 18.96% | -0.00% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 20.53% | 0.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMUB and MLPI is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025 | 0.71 |
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. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
AMUB
MLPI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
AMUB vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) and NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF (MLPI). 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 | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.60 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.07 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMUB vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMUB drawdown since its inception was -79.46%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUB and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMUB | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.46% | -5.38% | -74.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.02% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.22% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.58% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.56% | -1.42% | -3.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.01% | -1.59% | -27.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.30% | — | — |
Volatility
AMUB vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMUB | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.18% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.99% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.40% | 13.34% | +1.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.11% | 13.34% | +6.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.17% | 13.34% | +13.83% |
AMUB vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMUB has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMUB vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MLPI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.14%.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 0.00% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 7.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AMUB and MLPI have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MLPI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MLPI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for AMUB.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 7.14%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.
They also come from different issuers: UBS and NEOS. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for AMUB and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for AMUB and MLPI
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