MLPR vs. INTW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MLPR (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MLPR is passively managed, while INTW is actively managed. Over the past year, MLPR returned 28.25% vs 1964.55% for INTW. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPR charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.

Performance

MLPR vs. INTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPR achieves a 24.85% return, which is significantly lower than INTW's 750.22% return.

MLPR

• 1D: 2.97%
• 1M: -9.79%
• YTD: 24.85%
• 6M: 24.33%
• 1Y: 28.25%
• 3Y*: 31.47%
• 5Y*: 25.58%
• 10Y*: —

INTW

• 1D: -12.49%
• 1M: 12.21%
• YTD: 750.22%
• 6M: 775.58%
• 1Y: 1,964.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MLPR vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN	24.85%	-1.65%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	750.22%	60.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPR and INTW is -0.00, 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	-0.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.12

The correlation between MLPR and INTW shifts across timeframes, from -0.00 (1 year) to 0.12 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MLPR vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPR

MLPR Risk / Return Rank: 39
MLPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
MLPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
MLPR Omega Ratio Rank: 37
MLPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
MLPR Martin Ratio Rank: 39

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 98
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 94
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

MLPR vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). 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.

	MLPR	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.35	13.25	-11.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	5.13	-3.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.65	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.03	40.32	-38.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.88	91.49	-85.61

MLPR vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPR Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 13.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPR and INTW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MLPR vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPR drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum INTW drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPR and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPR	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.98%	-60.58%	+11.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.97%	-49.34%	+35.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.62%	-12.49%	+1.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.94%	-29.66%	+20.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.82%	21.70%	-16.88%

Volatility

MLPR vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) is 8.29%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 55.81%. This indicates that MLPR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPR	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.29%	55.81%	-47.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.56%	119.10%	-103.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.11%	150.14%	-129.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.40%	148.88%	-119.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.71%	148.88%	-115.17%

MLPR vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPR vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

MLPR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.36%, while INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN	9.36%	10.85%	9.57%	10.08%	7.49%	10.69%	4.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPR and INTW in my portfolio?

MLPR and INTW have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MLPR or INTW?

INTW has higher volatility (55.81%) compared to MLPR (8.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPR dropped -48.98% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, MLPR or INTW?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1964.55% vs 28.25% for MLPR. On fees, MLPR is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MLPR has been the lower-risk option at 8.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MLPR or INTW?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1964.55% return vs 28.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPR or INTW?

MLPR is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MLPR or INTW?

MLPR has the higher dividend yield at 9.36%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between MLPR and INTW?

They also come from different issuers: UBS and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MLPR and 1.50% for INTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.25 vs 1.35), 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.