CEFD vs. AMNA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and AMNA (ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while AMNA is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for AMNA.

Performance

CEFD vs. AMNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN (AMNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CEFD

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 3.13%
• 10Y*: —

AMNA

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFD vs. AMNA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	6.26%	14.15%	20.06%	8.36%	-28.93%	22.09%	21.37%
AMNA ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN	0.00%	0.00%	44.30%	12.50%	20.41%	36.44%	2.88%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFD and AMNA is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2020	0.44

The correlation between CEFD and AMNA shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (3 years) to 0.44 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CEFD vs. AMNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

CEFD vs. AMNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN (AMNA). 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.

	CEFD	AMNA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.84	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CEFD	AMNA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFD	AMNA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.95%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.14%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.72%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CEFD	AMNA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.27%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.93%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.31%	—	—

CEFD vs. AMNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than AMNA's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFD vs. AMNA - Dividend Comparison

CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%, while AMNA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AMNA ETRACS Alerian Midstream Energy Index ETN	0.00%	0.00%	4.32%	5.61%	5.48%	5.84%	2.12%
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.58%	14.88%	13.90%	14.76%	16.56%	10.31%	5.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFD and AMNA in my portfolio?

CEFD and AMNA have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CEFD or AMNA?

On fees, AMNA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFD or AMNA?

AMNA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for CEFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFD or AMNA?

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for AMNA.

What is the main difference between CEFD and AMNA?

CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while AMNA tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 0.75% for AMNA.