HAP vs. MLPI
HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) and MLPI (Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. HAP is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HAP charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
HAP vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HAP achieves a 21.49% return, which is significantly higher than MLPI's 17.58% return.
HAP
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 0.64%
- YTD
- 21.49%
- 6M
- 23.70%
- 1Y
- 46.66%
- 3Y*
- 18.93%
- 5Y*
- 11.51%
- 10Y*
- 11.99%
MLPI
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- YTD
- 17.58%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HAP vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 21.49% | 1.70% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 17.58% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between HAP and MLPI is 0.35, 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 19, 2025 | 0.35 |
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
HAP vs. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
HAP
MLPI
HAP vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) 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.
| HAP | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.65 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.05 | — | — |
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
| HAP | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.14 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.63 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | 3.49 | -3.23 |
Drawdowns
HAP vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HAP drawdown since its inception was -50.73%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAP and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HAP | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.73% | -5.38% | -45.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.92% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.95% | -3.84% | +1.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.03% | -1.27% | -10.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | — | — |
Volatility
HAP vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HAP | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.37% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.24% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.91% | 13.05% | +1.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.24% | 13.05% | +5.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.74% | 13.05% | +6.69% |
HAP vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
HAP has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
HAP vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
HAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than MLPI's 6.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 1.87% | 2.27% | 2.65% | 3.27% | 3.28% | 2.16% | 2.45% | 2.80% | 2.85% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 3.00% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 6.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HAP and MLPI have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 6.04%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.
They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for HAP and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for HAP 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