MLPD vs. HYBI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLPD (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF) and HYBI (NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPD is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe MLPX ATM BuyWrite Index, while HYBI is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Neos. MLPD is passively managed, while HYBI is actively managed. Over the past year, MLPD returned 15.24% vs 7.35% for HYBI. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for HYBI.

Performance

MLPD vs. HYBI - 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 NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF (HYBI). 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 HYBI's 1.56% return.

MLPD

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

HYBI

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.56%
• 6M: 2.01%
• 1Y: 7.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MLPD vs. HYBI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	5.20%	11.77%	3.67%
HYBI NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF	1.56%	6.97%	-0.48%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPD and HYBI 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2024	0.24

The correlation between MLPD and HYBI shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (1 year) to 0.24 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MLPD vs. HYBI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MLPD	HYBI
Energy	100.0%	3.6%
Basic Materials	-	1.8%
Communication Services	-	11.2%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.9%
Financial Services	-	11.8%
Healthcare	-	8.5%
Industrials	-	8.3%
Real Estate	-	1.9%
Technology	-	35.6%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

MLPD vs. HYBI — 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

HYBI

HYBI Risk / Return Rank: 78
HYBI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
HYBI Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
HYBI Omega Ratio Rank: 74
HYBI Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
HYBI Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. HYBI - 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 NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF (HYBI). 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	HYBI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.29	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	3.51	-0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.45	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	5.17	-1.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.41	16.91	-6.50
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. HYBI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPD Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the HYBI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPD and HYBI, 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	HYBI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08	2.29	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.15	0.97	+0.17

Drawdowns

MLPD vs. HYBI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPD drawdown since its inception was -12.90%, which is greater than HYBI's maximum drawdown of -4.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPD and HYBI.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPD	HYBI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.90%	-4.68%	-8.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.80%	-1.43%	-3.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.77%	-0.24%	-1.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.12%	-0.62%	-0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.47%	0.44%	+1.03%

Volatility

MLPD vs. HYBI - Volatility Comparison

Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF (MLPD) has a higher volatility of 2.91% compared to NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF (HYBI) at 0.98%. This indicates that MLPD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HYBI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPD	HYBI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.91%	0.98%	+1.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.32%	2.13%	+3.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.40%	3.23%	+4.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.40%	4.94%	+6.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.40%	4.94%	+6.46%

MLPD vs. HYBI - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than HYBI's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPD vs. HYBI - Dividend Comparison

MLPD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.44%, more than HYBI's 8.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
HYBI NEOS Enhanced Income Credit Select ETF	8.37%	8.48%	2.21%
MLPD Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure Covered Call ETF	13.44%	13.45%	6.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPD and HYBI in my portfolio?

MLPD and HYBI 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.

Which is riskier, MLPD or HYBI?

MLPD has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to HYBI (0.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPD dropped -12.90% vs HYBI's -4.68%.

Which ETF is better, MLPD or HYBI?

On 1-year performance, MLPD leads with 15.24% vs 7.35% for HYBI. On fees, MLPD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, HYBI has been the lower-risk option at 0.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MLPD or HYBI?

Over the 1-year period, MLPD has performed better with a 15.24% return vs 7.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPD or HYBI?

MLPD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for HYBI.

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

MLPD has the higher dividend yield at 13.44%, compared with 8.37% for HYBI.

What is the main difference between MLPD and HYBI?

MLPD is categorized as Derivative Income, while HYBI is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for MLPD and 0.68% for HYBI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HYBI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 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.