MLPD vs. CGHM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLPD (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF) and CGHM (Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe MLPX ATM BuyWrite Index, while CGHM is a High Yield Muni fund actively managed by Capital Group. MLPD is passively managed, while CGHM is actively managed. Over the past year, MLPD returned 15.24% vs 9.42% for CGHM. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. MLPD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for CGHM.

Performance

MLPD vs. CGHM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD) and Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPD achieves a 5.20% return, which is significantly higher than CGHM's 2.65% return.

MLPD

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: 5.20%
• 6M: 6.70%
• 1Y: 15.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGHM

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 2.65%
• 6M: 3.10%
• 1Y: 9.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MLPD vs. CGHM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	5.20%	11.77%	7.52%
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	2.65%	4.56%	2.71%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPD and CGHM is -0.17, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2024	-0.05

The correlation between MLPD and CGHM shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MLPD vs. CGHM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPD

MLPD Risk / Return Rank: 62
MLPD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
MLPD Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
MLPD Omega Ratio Rank: 64
MLPD Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
MLPD Martin Ratio Rank: 59

CGHM

CGHM Risk / Return Rank: 85
CGHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CGHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CGHM Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CGHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
CGHM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

MLPD vs. CGHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD) and Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM). 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.

	MLPD	CGHM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	3.03	-0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	4.44	-1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.68	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	3.71	-0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.41	14.39	-3.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLPD vs. CGHM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPD Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is lower than the CGHM Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPD and CGHM, 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

	MLPD	CGHM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08	3.03	-0.95
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.15	1.15	-0.01

Drawdowns

MLPD vs. CGHM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPD drawdown since its inception was -12.90%, which is greater than CGHM's maximum drawdown of -5.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPD and CGHM.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPD	CGHM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.90%	-5.90%	-7.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.80%	-2.55%	-2.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.77%	0.00%	-1.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.12%	-1.25%	+0.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.47%	0.66%	+0.81%

Volatility

MLPD vs. CGHM - Volatility Comparison

Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD) has a higher volatility of 2.91% compared to Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF (CGHM) at 1.03%. This indicates that MLPD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPD	CGHM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.91%	1.03%	+1.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.32%	2.21%	+3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.40%	3.12%	+4.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.40%	4.53%	+6.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.40%	4.53%	+6.87%

MLPD vs. CGHM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CGHM's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPD vs. CGHM - Dividend Comparison

MLPD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.44%, more than CGHM's 3.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CGHM Capital Group Municipal High-Income ETF	3.80%	3.61%	1.78%
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	13.44%	13.45%	6.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPD and CGHM in my portfolio?

MLPD and CGHM have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MLPD or CGHM?

MLPD has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to CGHM (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPD dropped -12.90% vs CGHM's -5.90%.

Which ETF is better, MLPD or CGHM?

On 1-year performance, MLPD leads with 15.24% vs 9.42% for CGHM. On fees, CGHM is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, CGHM has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MLPD or CGHM?

Over the 1-year period, MLPD has performed better with a 15.24% return vs 9.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPD or CGHM?

CGHM is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for MLPD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MLPD or CGHM?

MLPD has the higher dividend yield at 13.44%, compared with 3.80% for CGHM.

What is the main difference between MLPD and CGHM?

MLPD is categorized as Derivative Income, while CGHM is High Yield Muni. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for MLPD and 0.34% for CGHM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.08), 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.