BSMU vs. MLPI
BSMU (Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF) and MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMU is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco Bulletshares Municipal Bond 2030 Index, while MLPI is a MLPs fund actively managed by NEOS. BSMU is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.33, they often move in opposite directions. BSMU charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
BSMU vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSMU achieves a 0.75% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 19.13% return.
BSMU
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- 6M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- 0.75%
- 1Y
- 4.28%
- 3Y*
- 2.87%
- 5Y*
- -0.83%
- 10Y*
- —
MLPI
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- 6M
- 20.58%
- YTD
- 19.13%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSMU vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.75% | 0.18% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 19.13% | 0.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSMU and MLPI is -0.33, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025 | -0.33 |
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
BSMU vs. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
BSMU
MLPI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BSMU vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMU) 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.
| BSMU | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.99 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.73 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BSMU vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSMU drawdown since its inception was -19.48%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMU and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSMU | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.48% | -5.38% | -14.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.06% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.92% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.48% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.65% | -2.56% | -2.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.13% | -1.59% | -6.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.72% | — | — |
Volatility
BSMU vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSMU | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.60% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.54% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11% | 13.31% | -11.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.81% | 13.31% | -8.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.81% | 13.31% | -8.50% |
BSMU vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSMU has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
BSMU vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
BSMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than MLPI's 7.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMU Invesco BulletShares 2030 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.79% | 2.82% | 2.92% | 2.66% | 2.16% | 1.60% | 0.28% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 7.22% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSMU and MLPI have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BSMU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BSMU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 7.22%, compared with 2.79% for BSMU.
BSMU is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while MLPI is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and NEOS. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMU and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for BSMU 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