FTWO vs. MLPI
FTWO (Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF) and MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTWO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Bloomberg Natural Resources and Security Total Return Index, while MLPI is a MLPs fund actively managed by NEOS. FTWO is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FTWO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
FTWO vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTWO achieves a 7.77% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 19.61% return.
FTWO
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- -2.45%
- YTD
- 7.77%
- 6M
- 6.31%
- 1Y
- 24.37%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MLPI
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- -2.18%
- YTD
- 19.61%
- 6M
- 18.17%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FTWO vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF | 7.77% | 2.26% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 19.61% | 0.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTWO and MLPI is 0.13, 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 | 0.13 |
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
FTWO vs. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
FTWO
MLPI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FTWO vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) 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.
| FTWO | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.68 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.88 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FTWO vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTWO drawdown since its inception was -18.17%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTWO and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTWO | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.17% | -5.38% | -12.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.55% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.75% | -2.18% | -9.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.57% | -1.49% | -2.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.00% | — | — |
Volatility
FTWO vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTWO | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.27% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.08% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.71% | 13.05% | +5.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.31% | 13.05% | +6.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.31% | 13.05% | +6.26% |
FTWO vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTWO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTWO vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
FTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than MLPI's 7.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF | 1.04% | 1.02% | 1.23% | 0.59% |
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 7.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTWO and MLPI have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FTWO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FTWO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 7.19%, compared with 1.04% for FTWO.
FTWO is categorized as Energy Equities, while MLPI is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Strive and NEOS. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FTWO and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for FTWO 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