BCI vs. MLPI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCI is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while MLPI is a MLPs fund actively managed by NEOS. BCI is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BCI charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.

Performance

BCI vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) and NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF (MLPI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCI achieves a 15.26% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 19.61% return.

BCI

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: -9.78%
• YTD: 15.26%
• 6M: 13.54%
• 1Y: 23.04%
• 3Y*: 11.40%
• 5Y*: 9.52%
• 10Y*: —

MLPI

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: -2.18%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 6M: 18.17%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCI vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	15.26%	0.83%
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF	19.61%	0.36%

Correlation

The correlation between BCI and MLPI is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025	0.27

Return for Risk

BCI vs. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 39
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 44

MLPI

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

BCI vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) 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.

	BCI	MLPI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.95	—	—

Drawdowns

BCI vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and MLPI.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCI	MLPI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.69%	-5.38%	-27.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.50%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.12%	-2.18%	-10.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.99%	-1.49%	-10.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.34%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BCI	MLPI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.55%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.98%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.20%	13.05%	+4.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.79%	13.05%	+3.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.65%	13.05%	+2.60%

BCI vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCI has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCI vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison

BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.30%, more than MLPI's 7.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	14.30%	16.49%	3.29%	3.93%	19.98%	19.43%	0.68%	1.47%	1.13%	5.02%
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF	7.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCI and MLPI in my portfolio?

BCI and MLPI have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BCI or MLPI?

On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCI or MLPI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCI or MLPI?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 7.19% for MLPI.

What is the main difference between BCI and MLPI?

BCI is categorized as Commodities, while MLPI is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and NEOS. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for BCI and 0.68% for MLPI.