MLPA vs. AMUB
MLPA (Global X MLP ETF) and AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) are both MLPs funds - MLPA tracks the Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index while AMUB tracks the Alerian MLP Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPA returned 6.22%/yr vs 3.05%/yr for AMUB. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MLPA charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for AMUB.
Performance
MLPA vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MLPA achieves a 16.07% return, which is significantly lower than AMUB's 16.97% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPA has outperformed AMUB with an annualized return of 6.22%, while AMUB has yielded a comparatively lower 3.05% annualized return.
MLPA
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- -0.52%
- YTD
- 16.07%
- 6M
- 14.82%
- 1Y
- 16.32%
- 3Y*
- 17.12%
- 5Y*
- 15.58%
- 10Y*
- 6.22%
AMUB
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- -2.08%
- YTD
- 16.97%
- 6M
- 15.25%
- 1Y
- 15.77%
- 3Y*
- 15.80%
- 5Y*
- 12.34%
- 10Y*
- 3.05%
MLPA vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 16.07% | 5.73% | 20.35% | 15.93% | 27.03% | 39.64% | -33.97% | 11.91% | -15.71% | -8.31% |
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 16.97% | 2.05% | 15.68% | 16.89% | 21.91% | 28.83% | -36.47% | -1.78% | -19.25% | -13.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPA and AMUB is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2015 | 0.75 |
The correlation between MLPA and AMUB shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (all time) to 0.93 (5 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
MLPA vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank
MLPA
AMUB
MLPA vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). 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.
| MLPA | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.20 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.97 | 1.53 | +0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.99 | 4.52 | +1.47 |
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
| MLPA | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.37 | 1.18 | +0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.86 | 0.61 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 | 0.11 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | 0.00 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
MLPA vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPA drawdown since its inception was -78.75%, roughly equal to the maximum AMUB drawdown of -79.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPA and AMUB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPA | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.75% | -79.46% | +0.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.33% | -10.37% | +2.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.20% | -17.22% | +3.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.75% | -20.58% | +1.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.05% | -78.86% | +4.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.84% | -6.15% | +2.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.27% | -29.23% | +8.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.73% | 3.51% | -0.78% |
Volatility
MLPA vs. AMUB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) is 4.50%, while ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) has a volatility of 5.40%. This indicates that MLPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPA | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.50% | 5.40% | -0.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.47% | 9.82% | -1.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.00% | 13.60% | -1.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.21% | 20.24% | -2.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.47% | 27.09% | +0.38% |
MLPA vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPA has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than AMUB's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPA vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison
MLPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.28%, while AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 7.28% | 7.82% | 7.25% | 7.49% | 7.30% | 8.72% | 13.84% | 9.09% | 10.00% | 8.05% | 7.15% | 9.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, MLPA and AMUB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
AMUB has higher volatility (5.40%) compared to MLPA (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPA dropped -78.75% vs AMUB's -79.46%.
On 10-year performance, MLPA leads with 6.22% vs 3.05% for AMUB. On fees, MLPA is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, MLPA has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MLPA has performed better with a 6.22% return vs 3.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MLPA is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for AMUB.
MLPA has the higher dividend yield at 7.28%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.
MLPA tracks Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index, while AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for MLPA and 0.80% for AMUB.
MLPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 1.18), 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 MLPA and AMUB
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