MLPA vs. COPX
MLPA (Global X MLP ETF) and COPX (Global X Copper Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPA is a MLPs fund tracking the Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index, while COPX is a Copper fund tracking the Solactive Global Copper Miners Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPA returned 5.85%/yr vs 18.56%/yr for COPX. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for COPX.
Performance
MLPA vs. COPX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MLPA achieves a 16.12% return, which is significantly higher than COPX's 6.98% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPA has underperformed COPX with an annualized return of 5.85%, while COPX has yielded a comparatively higher 18.56% annualized return.
MLPA
- 1D
- -0.64%
- 1M
- 1.22%
- 6M
- 14.09%
- YTD
- 16.12%
- 1Y
- 16.37%
- 3Y*
- 16.19%
- 5Y*
- 15.54%
- 10Y*
- 5.85%
COPX
- 1D
- 1.51%
- 1M
- -10.67%
- 6M
- -0.95%
- YTD
- 6.98%
- 1Y
- 74.05%
- 3Y*
- 28.67%
- 5Y*
- 18.00%
- 10Y*
- 18.56%
MLPA vs. COPX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 16.12% | 5.73% | 20.35% | 15.93% | 27.03% | 39.64% | -33.97% | 11.91% | -15.71% | -8.31% |
COPX Global X Copper Miners ETF | 6.98% | 93.50% | 3.57% | 8.38% | -0.76% | 23.39% | 51.66% | 12.48% | -31.31% | 38.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPA and COPX is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2012 | 0.42 |
The correlation between MLPA and COPX shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.42 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MLPA vs. COPX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MLPA
COPX
Energy
-
Industrials
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Energy
MLPA
COPX
-
Industrials
MLPA
COPX
Utilities
MLPA
COPX
-
Basic Materials
MLPA
-
COPX
Communication Services
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Consumer Cyclical
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Consumer Defensive
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Financial Services
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Healthcare
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Real Estate
MLPA
-
COPX
-
Technology
MLPA
-
COPX
-
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. COPX — Risk / Return Rank
MLPA
COPX
MLPA vs. COPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) and Global X Copper Miners ETF (COPX). 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.
| MLPA | COPX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.27 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.99 | 2.63 | -0.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.23 | 7.22 | -1.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MLPA vs. COPX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPA drawdown since its inception was -78.75%, smaller than the maximum COPX drawdown of -83.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPA and COPX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPA | COPX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.75% | -83.16% | +4.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.33% | -27.82% | +19.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.20% | -39.72% | +25.52% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.75% | -42.12% | +23.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.05% | -65.41% | -8.64% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.81% | -19.75% | +15.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.16% | -39.18% | +19.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.17% | 10.13% | -6.96% |
Volatility
MLPA vs. COPX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) is 5.10%, while Global X Copper Miners ETF (COPX) has a volatility of 15.64%. This indicates that MLPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPA | COPX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.10% | 15.64% | -10.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.42% | 39.22% | -29.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.38% | 44.75% | -32.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.02% | 37.14% | -19.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.41% | 35.75% | -8.34% |
MLPA vs. COPX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than COPX's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPA vs. COPX - Dividend Comparison
MLPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.27%, more than COPX's 2.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COPX Global X Copper Miners ETF | 2.52% | 2.68% | 1.80% | 2.39% | 3.14% | 1.48% | 1.30% | 1.37% | 2.59% | 1.57% | 0.60% | 1.20% |
MLPA Global X MLP ETF | 7.27% | 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 COPX have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COPX has higher volatility (15.64%) compared to MLPA (5.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPA dropped -78.75% vs COPX's -83.16%.
On 10-year performance, COPX leads with 18.56% vs 5.85% for MLPA. On fees, COPX is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, MLPA has been the lower-risk option at 5.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, COPX has performed better with a 18.56% return vs 5.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COPX is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MLPA.
MLPA has the higher dividend yield at 7.27%, compared with 2.52% for COPX.
MLPA is categorized as MLPs, while COPX is Copper. MLPA tracks Solactive MLP Infrastructure Index, while COPX tracks Solactive Global Copper Miners Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for MLPA and 0.65% for COPX.
COPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 1.34), 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 COPX
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