AMZA vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

AMZA (InfraCap MLP ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AMZA is a MLPs fund actively managed by Virtus Investment Partners, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AMZA returned 18.45%/yr vs 20.20%/yr for UMI. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMZA charges 2.01%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

AMZA vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZA achieves a 19.38% return, which is significantly lower than UMI's 21.76% return.

AMZA

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -5.71%
• YTD: 19.38%
• 6M: 19.96%
• 1Y: 13.76%
• 3Y*: 21.59%
• 5Y*: 18.45%
• 10Y*: 4.73%

UMI

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: -5.27%
• YTD: 21.76%
• 6M: 23.01%
• 1Y: 24.46%
• 3Y*: 27.84%
• 5Y*: 20.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

AMZA vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF	19.38%	0.17%	30.90%	23.35%	33.20%	51.22%	-49.25%	6.27%	-26.78%	11.53%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	21.76%	5.11%	42.97%	14.60%	20.78%	20.97%	-8.25%	21.06%	-10.64%	2.76%

Correlation

The correlation between AMZA and UMI is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2017	0.69

The correlation between AMZA and UMI shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (all time) to 0.86 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AMZA vs. UMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMZA	UMI
Energy	99.8%	99.0%
Utilities	0.2%	1.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

AMZA vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMZA

AMZA Risk / Return Rank: 22
AMZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
AMZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
AMZA Omega Ratio Rank: 20
AMZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
AMZA Martin Ratio Rank: 23

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 54
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 48
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

AMZA vs. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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.

	AMZA	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.78	1.73	-0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.19	2.40	-1.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.30	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.14	3.28	-2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.79	8.47	-5.68

AMZA vs. UMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZA Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is lower than the UMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZA and UMI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AMZA vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZA drawdown since its inception was -91.46%, which is greater than UMI's maximum drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZA and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMZA	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.46%	-48.08%	-43.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.16%	-7.50%	-4.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.56%	-17.08%	-1.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	-20.05%	-5.10%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.27%	-5.35%	-6.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.86%	-6.59%	-38.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.95%	2.90%	+2.05%

Volatility

AMZA vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) is 5.05%, while USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) has a volatility of 5.33%. This indicates that AMZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMZA	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.05%	5.33%	-0.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.40%	11.05%	+2.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.75%	14.23%	+3.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.64%	19.45%	+6.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.21%	23.16%	+14.05%

AMZA vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZA has a 2.01% expense ratio, which is higher than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMZA vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

AMZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.38%, more than UMI's 6.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF	8.38%	8.81%	7.29%	9.40%	7.65%	10.24%	22.13%	19.47%	34.46%	24.16%	18.36%	18.21%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	6.02%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMZA and UMI in my portfolio?

AMZA and UMI have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMZA or UMI?

UMI has higher volatility (5.33%) compared to AMZA (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZA dropped -91.46% vs UMI's -48.08%.

Which ETF is better, AMZA or UMI?

On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 20.20% vs 18.45% for AMZA. On fees, UMI is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, AMZA has been the lower-risk option at 5.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMZA or UMI?

Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 20.20% return vs 18.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMZA or UMI?

UMI is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 2.01% for AMZA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMZA or UMI?

AMZA has the higher dividend yield at 8.38%, compared with 6.02% for UMI.

What is the main difference between AMZA and UMI?

AMZA is categorized as MLPs, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 2.01% for AMZA and 0.85% for UMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 0.78), 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.