MGNR vs. CPII

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MGNR (American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF) and CPII (American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MGNR is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by American Beacon, while CPII is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by American Beacon. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MGNR returned 51.63% vs 3.03% for CPII. Their -0.01 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. MGNR charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for CPII.

Performance

MGNR vs. CPII - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGNR achieves a 11.56% return, which is significantly higher than CPII's 3.09% return.

MGNR

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 1.46%
• 6M: 0.28%
• YTD: 11.56%
• 1Y: 51.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 33.81%

CPII

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.11%
• 6M: 2.49%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 1Y: 3.03%
• 3Y*: 4.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.59%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CPII American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF	$7.01K	$4.83K	$26.03K
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF	$4.03M	$4.51M	$4.61M

MGNR vs. CPII - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF	11.56%	50.57%	22.90%
CPII American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF	3.09%	2.76%	4.22%

Correlation

The correlation between MGNR and CPII is -0.07, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2024	-0.01

Return for Risk

MGNR vs. CPII — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MGNR

MGNR Risk / Return Rank: 78
MGNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
MGNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
MGNR Omega Ratio Rank: 79
MGNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
MGNR Martin Ratio Rank: 69

CPII

CPII Risk / Return Rank: 36
CPII Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
CPII Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
CPII Omega Ratio Rank: 35
CPII Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
CPII Martin Ratio Rank: 35

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MGNR vs. CPII - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) and American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF (CPII). 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.

	MGNR	CPII	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	0.92	+1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.56	1.34	+1.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.17	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.35	1.43	+1.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.85	3.43	+5.42

MGNR vs. CPII - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is higher than the CPII Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGNR and CPII, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MGNR vs. CPII - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGNR drawdown since its inception was -22.06%, which is greater than CPII's maximum drawdown of -6.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGNR and CPII.

Drawdown Indicators

	MGNR	CPII	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.06%	-6.40%	-15.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.51%	-2.13%	-13.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-4.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.95%	-1.53%	-11.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.40%	-1.61%	-2.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.85%	0.88%	+4.97%

Volatility

MGNR vs. CPII - Volatility Comparison

American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) has a higher volatility of 6.52% compared to American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF (CPII) at 0.97%. This indicates that MGNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPII based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MGNR	CPII	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.52%	0.97%	+5.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.00%	2.95%	+16.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.04%	3.31%	+21.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.18%	5.84%	+19.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.18%	5.84%	+19.34%

MGNR vs. CPII - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGNR has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CPII's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

MGNR vs. CPII - Dividend Comparison

MGNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.84%, less than CPII's 4.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CPII American Beacon Ionic Inflation Protection ETF	4.64%	4.20%	5.47%	5.86%	2.21%
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF	0.84%	1.17%	0.79%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MGNR and CPII in my portfolio?

MGNR and CPII have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MGNR or CPII?

MGNR has higher volatility (6.52%) compared to CPII (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGNR dropped -22.06% vs CPII's -6.40%.

Which ETF is better, MGNR or CPII?

On 1-year performance, MGNR leads with 51.63% vs 3.03% for CPII. On fees, CPII is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, CPII has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MGNR or CPII?

Over the 1-year period, MGNR has performed better with a 51.63% return vs 3.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MGNR or CPII?

CPII is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MGNR.

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

CPII has the higher dividend yield at 4.64%, compared with 0.84% for MGNR.

What is the main difference between MGNR and CPII?

MGNR is categorized as Energy Equities, while CPII is Inflation-Protected Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MGNR and 0.74% for CPII.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MGNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 0.92), 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.