PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AMUB vs. PFFL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AMUB vs. PFFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) and ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMUB achieves a 16.97% return, which is significantly higher than PFFL's 0.10% return.


AMUB

1D
-0.23%
1M
-2.08%
YTD
16.97%
6M
15.25%
1Y
15.77%
3Y*
15.80%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
3.05%

PFFL

1D
-0.99%
1M
-1.06%
YTD
0.10%
6M
0.21%
1Y
8.48%
3Y*
3.14%
5Y*
-5.89%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMUB vs. PFFL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
AMUB
ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B
16.97%2.05%15.68%16.89%21.91%28.83%-36.47%-1.78%-20.04%
PFFL
ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN
0.10%2.18%4.77%8.65%-39.15%7.52%-15.47%30.21%-11.05%

Correlation

The correlation between AMUB and PFFL is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.08

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018

0.29

Over the past year, the correlation between AMUB and PFFL has dropped to 0.08 - well below their long-term average of 0.29, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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. PFFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMUB
AMUB Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
AMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
AMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

PFFL
PFFL Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
PFFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFFL Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
PFFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFFL Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AMUB vs. PFFL - 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 Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL). 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.


AMUBPFFLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.18

0.50

+0.67

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.69

0.81

+0.88

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.11

+0.10

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.53

0.71

+0.82

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

4.52

1.76

+2.77

AMUB vs. PFFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMUB Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is higher than the PFFL Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMUB and PFFL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AMUBPFFLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.18

0.50

+0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.61

-0.25

+0.86

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.00

-0.07

+0.07

Drawdowns

AMUB vs. PFFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMUB drawdown since its inception was -79.46%, roughly equal to the maximum PFFL drawdown of -80.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMUB and PFFL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AMUBPFFLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.46%

-80.68%

+1.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.37%

-11.92%

+1.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.22%

-23.75%

+6.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.58%

-48.51%

+27.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-78.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.15%

-38.34%

+32.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.23%

-28.54%

-0.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.51%

4.84%

-1.33%

Volatility

AMUB vs. PFFL - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) at 3.83%. This indicates that AMUB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AMUBPFFLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.40%

3.83%

+1.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.82%

10.33%

-0.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.60%

16.91%

-3.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.24%

23.62%

-3.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.09%

55.35%

-28.26%

AMUB vs. PFFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMUB has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than PFFL's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

AMUB vs. PFFL - Dividend Comparison

AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.44%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
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%
PFFL
ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN
12.44%13.27%13.76%13.71%13.90%8.82%9.75%11.21%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


AMUB and PFFL have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AMUB has higher volatility (5.40%) compared to PFFL (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMUB dropped -79.46% vs PFFL's -80.68%.

On 5-year performance, AMUB leads with 12.34% vs -5.89% for PFFL. On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, PFFL has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AMUB has performed better with a 12.34% return vs -5.89%. 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 0.85% for PFFL.

PFFL has the higher dividend yield at 12.44%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.

AMUB is categorized as MLPs, while PFFL is Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds. AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index, while PFFL tracks Solactive Preferred Stock ETF Index. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for AMUB and 0.85% for PFFL.

AMUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.18 vs 0.50), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AMUB and PFFL

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