CATF vs. MLPI
CATF (American Century California Municipal Bond ETF) and MLPI (Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CATF is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by American Century, while MLPI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.31, they often move in opposite directions. CATF charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
CATF vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CATF achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 17.58% return.
CATF
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- 1.92%
- 6M
- 1.99%
- 1Y
- 7.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MLPI
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- YTD
- 17.58%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CATF vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CATF American Century California Municipal Bond ETF | 1.92% | 0.03% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 17.58% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between CATF and MLPI is -0.31, 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 19, 2025 | -0.31 |
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
CATF vs. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
CATF
MLPI
CATF vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century California Municipal Bond ETF (CATF) 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.
| CATF | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.90 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.17 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CATF | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 3.49 | -2.69 |
Drawdowns
CATF vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CATF drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum MLPI drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CATF and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CATF | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.83% | -5.38% | +0.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -3.84% | +3.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.27% | -1.27% | 0.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.79% | — | — |
Volatility
CATF vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CATF | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.06% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.18% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.14% | 13.05% | -9.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.33% | 13.05% | -8.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.33% | 13.05% | -8.72% |
CATF vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
CATF has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
CATF vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
CATF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, less than MLPI's 6.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CATF American Century California Municipal Bond ETF | 3.22% | 3.40% | 1.32% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 6.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CATF and MLPI have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CATF is cheaper at 0.27% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CATF is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 6.04%, compared with 3.22% for CATF.
CATF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while MLPI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: American Century and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for CATF and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for CATF 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