MLPA vs. AMZA
MLPA (Global X MLP ETF) and AMZA (InfraCap MLP ETF) are both MLPs funds. MLPA is passively managed, while AMZA is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPA returned 6.22%/yr vs 4.86%/yr for AMZA. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MLPA charges 0.46%/yr vs 2.01%/yr for AMZA.
Performance
MLPA vs. AMZA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MLPA achieves a 16.07% return, which is significantly lower than AMZA's 22.22% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPA has outperformed AMZA with an annualized return of 6.22%, while AMZA has yielded a comparatively lower 4.86% 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%
AMZA
- 1D
- 0.39%
- 1M
- -0.92%
- YTD
- 22.22%
- 6M
- 20.41%
- 1Y
- 17.55%
- 3Y*
- 22.02%
- 5Y*
- 19.41%
- 10Y*
- 4.86%
MLPA vs. AMZA - 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% |
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF | 22.22% | 0.17% | 30.90% | 23.35% | 33.20% | 51.22% | -49.25% | 6.27% | -26.78% | -6.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPA and AMZA is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 3, 2014 | 0.93 |
The correlation between MLPA and AMZA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
MLPA vs. AMZA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MLPA
AMZA
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Energy
MLPA
AMZA
Utilities
MLPA
AMZA
Basic Materials
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Communication Services
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Consumer Cyclical
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Consumer Defensive
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Financial Services
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Healthcare
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Industrials
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Real Estate
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
Technology
MLPA
-
AMZA
-
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. AMZA — Risk / Return Rank
MLPA
AMZA
MLPA vs. AMZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) and InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA). 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 | AMZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.17 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.97 | 1.45 | +0.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.99 | 3.65 | +2.34 |
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 | AMZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.37 | 1.00 | +0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.86 | 0.76 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 | 0.13 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | -0.02 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
MLPA vs. AMZA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPA drawdown since its inception was -78.75%, smaller than the maximum AMZA drawdown of -91.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPA and AMZA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPA | AMZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.75% | -91.46% | +12.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.33% | -12.16% | +3.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.20% | -18.56% | +4.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.75% | -25.15% | +6.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.05% | -86.84% | +12.79% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.84% | -10.19% | +6.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.27% | -45.02% | +24.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.73% | 4.82% | -2.09% |
Volatility
MLPA vs. AMZA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) is 4.50%, while InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) has a volatility of 5.80%. This indicates that MLPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPA | AMZA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.50% | 5.80% | -1.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.47% | 13.40% | -4.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.00% | 17.72% | -5.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.21% | 25.84% | -7.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.47% | 37.25% | -9.78% |
MLPA vs. AMZA - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPA has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than AMZA's 2.01% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPA vs. AMZA - Dividend Comparison
MLPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.28%, less than AMZA's 8.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF | 8.02% | 8.81% | 7.29% | 9.40% | 7.65% | 10.24% | 22.13% | 19.47% | 34.46% | 24.16% | 18.36% | 18.21% |
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
MLPA and AMZA have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AMZA has higher volatility (5.80%) compared to MLPA (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPA dropped -78.75% vs AMZA's -91.46%.
On 10-year performance, MLPA leads with 6.22% vs 4.86% for AMZA. 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 4.86%. 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 2.01% for AMZA.
AMZA has the higher dividend yield at 8.02%, compared with 7.28% for MLPA.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Virtus Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for MLPA and 2.01% for AMZA.
MLPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 1.00), 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 AMZA
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