IRVH vs. MLPB
IRVH (Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF) and MLPB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B) are both exchange-traded funds - IRVH is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by Global X, while MLPB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index. IRVH is actively managed, while MLPB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IRVH returned 0.36%/yr vs 20.95%/yr for MLPB. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IRVH charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for MLPB.
Performance
IRVH vs. MLPB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IRVH achieves a -4.22% return, which is significantly lower than MLPB's 19.99% return.
IRVH
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -0.62%
- 6M
- -3.96%
- YTD
- -4.22%
- 1Y
- -2.61%
- 3Y*
- 0.36%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MLPB
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 1.21%
- 6M
- 17.31%
- YTD
- 19.99%
- 1Y
- 20.64%
- 3Y*
- 20.95%
- 5Y*
- 19.39%
- 10Y*
- 8.13%
IRVH vs. MLPB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF | -4.22% | 7.71% | -5.49% | 0.83% | -6.69% |
MLPB ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B | 19.99% | 7.40% | 25.53% | 22.01% | 20.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between IRVH and MLPB is -0.12, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 6, 2022 | 0.00 |
The correlation between IRVH and MLPB shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.00 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
IRVH vs. MLPB — Risk / Return Rank
IRVH
MLPB
IRVH vs. MLPB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B (MLPB). 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.
| IRVH | MLPB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.26 | -0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.44 | 2.15 | -2.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.93 | 5.61 | -6.53 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IRVH vs. MLPB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IRVH drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum MLPB drawdown of -71.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IRVH and MLPB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IRVH | MLPB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.98% | -71.93% | +56.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.11% | -9.68% | +3.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.03% | -16.49% | +8.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.41% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.93% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.14% | -4.47% | -6.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.74% | -14.74% | +5.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.90% | 3.70% | -0.80% |
Volatility
IRVH vs. MLPB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH) is 1.17%, while ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B (MLPB) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that IRVH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MLPB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IRVH | MLPB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.17% | 5.61% | -4.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.38% | 10.90% | -7.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.77% | 14.02% | -9.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.76% | 19.87% | -11.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.76% | 27.18% | -18.42% |
IRVH vs. MLPB - Expense Ratio Comparison
IRVH has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPB's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
IRVH vs. MLPB - Dividend Comparison
IRVH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.65%, less than MLPB's 5.84% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF | 5.65% | 4.89% | 3.34% | 3.69% | 2.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MLPB ETRACS Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index ETN Series B | 5.84% | 6.51% | 5.95% | 6.37% | 6.00% | 6.98% | 11.93% | 7.98% | 8.11% | 7.23% | 6.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IRVH and MLPB have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MLPB has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to IRVH (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IRVH dropped -14.98% vs MLPB's -71.93%.
On 3-year performance, MLPB leads with 20.95% vs 0.36% for IRVH. On fees, IRVH is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, IRVH has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MLPB has performed better with a 20.95% return vs 0.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IRVH is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for MLPB.
MLPB has the higher dividend yield at 5.84%, compared with 5.65% for IRVH.
IRVH is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while MLPB is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Global X and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IRVH and 0.85% for MLPB.
MLPB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs -0.56), 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.
Find the right allocation for IRVH and MLPB
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