AMUB vs. MLPR
AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) and MLPR (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - AMUB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index, while MLPR is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AMUB returned 15.00%/yr vs 31.23%/yr for MLPR. Their correlation of 0.95 means they have usually moved in the same direction. AMUB charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for MLPR.
Performance
AMUB vs. MLPR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMUB achieves a 23.05% return, which is significantly lower than MLPR's 39.50% return.
AMUB
- 1D
- 1.06%
- 1M
- 7.16%
- 6M
- 13.97%
- YTD
- 23.05%
- 1Y
- 20.12%
- 3Y*
- 15.25%
- 5Y*
- 15.00%
- 10Y*
- 3.58%
- ALL TIME*
- 0.51%
MLPR
- 1D
- 1.62%
- 1M
- 11.14%
- 6M
- 25.11%
- YTD
- 39.50%
- 1Y
- 39.67%
- 3Y*
- 31.28%
- 5Y*
- 31.23%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 32.46%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.17K | $7.30K | $19.86K | |
| $34.92K | $44.03K | $37.73K |
AMUB vs. MLPR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 23.05% | 2.05% | 15.68% | 16.89% | 21.91% | 28.83% | -5.89% |
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 39.50% | 9.83% | 31.57% | 35.87% | 41.04% | 57.33% | -7.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMUB and MLPR is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.96 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020 | 0.95 |
The correlation between AMUB and MLPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. MLPR — Risk / Return Rank
AMUB
MLPR
AMUB vs. MLPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) and ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR). 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 | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.28 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.65 | 2.55 | -0.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.50 | 7.25 | -2.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMUB vs. MLPR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMUB drawdown since its inception was -79.46%, which is greater than MLPR's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUB and MLPR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMUB | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.46% | -48.98% | -30.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.02% | -14.31% | +3.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.22% | -24.45% | +7.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.58% | -28.66% | +8.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.28% | -0.13% | -1.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.87% | -8.89% | -19.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.36% | 5.35% | -0.99% |
Volatility
AMUB vs. MLPR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) is 4.77%, while ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) has a volatility of 8.44%. This indicates that AMUB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MLPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMUB | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.77% | 8.44% | -3.67% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.09% | 17.18% | -6.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.47% | 22.38% | -7.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.86% | 29.11% | -9.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.18% | 33.66% | -6.48% |
AMUB vs. MLPR - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMUB has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPR's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMUB vs. MLPR - Dividend Comparison
AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MLPR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.83%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 8.83% | 10.85% | 9.57% | 10.08% | 7.49% | 10.69% | 4.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, AMUB and MLPR 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.
MLPR has higher volatility (8.44%) compared to AMUB (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMUB dropped -79.46% vs MLPR's -48.98%.
On 5-year performance, MLPR leads with 31.23% vs 15.00% for AMUB. On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, AMUB has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MLPR has performed better with a 31.23% return vs 15.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AMUB is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MLPR.
MLPR has the higher dividend yield at 8.83%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.
AMUB is categorized as MLPs, while MLPR is Leveraged Equities. AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index, while MLPR tracks Alerian MLP Index (150%). Their fees differ too: 0.80% for AMUB and 0.95% for MLPR.
MLPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 1.26), 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 MLPR
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