MLPA vs. NML

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLPA (Global X MLP ETF) and NML (Neuberger Berman MLP) are both MLPs funds. MLPA is passively managed, while NML is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPA returned 6.22%/yr vs 10.28%/yr for NML. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MLPA charges 0.46%/yr vs 2.72%/yr for NML.

Performance

MLPA vs. NML - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) and Neuberger Berman MLP (NML). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPA achieves a 16.07% return, which is significantly lower than NML's 21.99% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPA has underperformed NML with an annualized return of 6.22%, while NML has yielded a comparatively higher 10.28% 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%

NML

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: -2.90%
• YTD: 21.99%
• 6M: 19.87%
• 1Y: 24.28%
• 3Y*: 26.24%
• 5Y*: 23.53%
• 10Y*: 10.28%

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

MLPA vs. NML - 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%
NML Neuberger Berman MLP	21.99%	4.36%	40.55%	14.61%	32.75%	61.76%	-45.84%	10.60%	-23.02%	7.07%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPA and NML is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2013	0.73

The correlation between MLPA and NML shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (3 years) to 0.79 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MLPA vs. NML — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MLPA

MLPA Risk / Return Rank: 37
MLPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
MLPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
MLPA Omega Ratio Rank: 34
MLPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
MLPA Martin Ratio Rank: 37

NML

NML Risk / Return Rank: 29
NML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
NML Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
NML Omega Ratio Rank: 23
NML Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
NML Martin Ratio Rank: 31

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MLPA vs. NML - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) and Neuberger Berman MLP (NML). 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	NML	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	1.45	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	1.99	-0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.25	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	2.52	-0.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.99	7.21	-1.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLPA vs. NML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPA Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is comparable to the NML Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPA and NML, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MLPA	NML	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	1.45	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	0.99	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.23	0.29	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.16	0.07	+0.10

Drawdowns

MLPA vs. NML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPA drawdown since its inception was -78.75%, smaller than the maximum NML drawdown of -90.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPA and NML.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPA	NML	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.75%	-90.48%	+11.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.33%	-9.67%	+1.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.20%	-16.92%	+2.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.75%	-21.40%	+2.65%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.05%	-84.84%	+10.79%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.84%	-5.10%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.27%	-37.09%	+16.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.73%	3.38%	-0.65%

Volatility

MLPA vs. NML - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X MLP ETF (MLPA) is 4.50%, while Neuberger Berman MLP (NML) has a volatility of 6.64%. This indicates that MLPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPA	NML	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.50%	6.64%	-2.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.47%	13.50%	-5.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.00%	17.00%	-5.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.21%	23.94%	-5.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.47%	35.15%	-7.68%

MLPA vs. NML - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPA has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than NML's 2.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPA vs. NML - Dividend Comparison

MLPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.28%, which matches NML's 7.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
NML Neuberger Berman MLP	7.21%	8.24%	7.94%	10.19%	4.26%	3.54%	8.33%	9.76%	9.87%	7.04%	8.63%	15.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPA and NML in my portfolio?

MLPA and NML have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MLPA or NML?

NML has higher volatility (6.64%) compared to MLPA (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPA dropped -78.75% vs NML's -90.48%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs 1.37), 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.