EINC vs. MGNR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) and MGNR (American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. EINC is passively managed, while MGNR is actively managed. Over the past year, EINC returned 26.00% vs 74.12% for MGNR. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EINC charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for MGNR.

Performance

EINC vs. MGNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with EINC having a 24.74% return and MGNR slightly higher at 25.90%.

EINC

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: -1.60%
• YTD: 24.74%
• 6M: 24.40%
• 1Y: 26.00%
• 3Y*: 29.18%
• 5Y*: 20.73%
• 10Y*: 11.62%

MGNR

• 1D: -1.76%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 25.90%
• 6M: 27.71%
• 1Y: 74.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EINC vs. MGNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	24.74%	7.11%	44.97%
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF	25.90%	50.57%	22.78%

Correlation

The correlation between EINC and MGNR is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2024	0.45

Over the past year, the correlation between EINC and MGNR has dropped to 0.19 - well below their long-term average of 0.45, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

EINC vs. MGNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EINC

EINC Risk / Return Rank: 53
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 49
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 53

MGNR

MGNR Risk / Return Rank: 89
MGNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
MGNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
MGNR Omega Ratio Rank: 86
MGNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
MGNR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

EINC vs. MGNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR). 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.

	EINC	MGNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.78	3.24	-1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	3.77	-1.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.53	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.31	6.02	-2.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.18	24.36	-15.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EINC vs. MGNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EINC Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is lower than the MGNR Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EINC and MGNR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EINC	MGNR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.78	3.24	-1.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.07	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.04	1.77	-1.73

Drawdowns

EINC vs. MGNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EINC drawdown since its inception was -87.55%, which is greater than MGNR's maximum drawdown of -22.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EINC and MGNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EINC	MGNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.55%	-22.06%	-65.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.89%	-12.38%	+4.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.01%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-68.85%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.44%	-1.76%	-3.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.29%	-3.86%	-40.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.85%	3.05%	-0.20%

Volatility

EINC vs. MGNR - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) have volatilities of 6.39% and 6.59%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EINC	MGNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.39%	6.59%	-0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.57%	17.67%	-6.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.72%	23.04%	-8.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.58%	25.03%	-5.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.43%	25.03%	+0.40%

EINC vs. MGNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EINC has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than MGNR's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

EINC vs. MGNR - Dividend Comparison

EINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.55%, more than MGNR's 1.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	3.55%	4.51%	3.33%	3.77%	2.89%	6.03%	6.69%	9.66%	11.31%	8.53%	9.71%	28.53%
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF	1.07%	1.17%	0.79%	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 EINC and MGNR in my portfolio?

EINC and MGNR have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EINC or MGNR?

MGNR has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to EINC (6.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EINC dropped -87.55% vs MGNR's -22.06%.

Which ETF is better, EINC or MGNR?

On 1-year performance, MGNR leads with 74.12% vs 26.00% for EINC. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EINC has been the lower-risk option at 6.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EINC or MGNR?

Over the 1-year period, MGNR has performed better with a 74.12% return vs 26.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EINC or MGNR?

EINC is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MGNR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EINC or MGNR?

EINC has the higher dividend yield at 3.55%, compared with 1.07% for MGNR.

What is the main difference between EINC and MGNR?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EINC and 0.75% for MGNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MGNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 vs 1.78), 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.