MLPR vs. UMI
MLPR (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPR is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index (150%), while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. MLPR is passively managed, while UMI is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, MLPR returned 24.78%/yr vs 20.20%/yr for UMI. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MLPR charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.
Performance
MLPR vs. UMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with MLPR having a 21.25% return and UMI slightly higher at 21.76%.
MLPR
- 1D
- -0.79%
- 1M
- -12.39%
- YTD
- 21.25%
- 6M
- 21.60%
- 1Y
- 23.14%
- 3Y*
- 30.20%
- 5Y*
- 24.78%
- 10Y*
- —
UMI
- 1D
- 0.96%
- 1M
- -5.27%
- YTD
- 21.76%
- 6M
- 23.01%
- 1Y
- 24.46%
- 3Y*
- 27.84%
- 5Y*
- 20.20%
- 10Y*
- —
MLPR vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 21.25% | 9.83% | 31.57% | 35.87% | 41.04% | 57.33% | -7.10% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 21.76% | 5.11% | 42.97% | 14.60% | 20.78% | 20.97% | 23.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPR and UMI is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020 | 0.82 |
The correlation between MLPR and UMI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
MLPR vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank
MLPR
UMI
MLPR vs. UMI - 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 USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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 | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.30 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.66 | 3.28 | -1.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.86 | 8.47 | -3.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MLPR vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPR drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, roughly equal to the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPR and UMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPR | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.98% | -48.08% | -0.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.97% | -7.50% | -6.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.45% | -17.08% | -7.37% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.66% | -20.05% | -8.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.19% | -5.35% | -7.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.94% | -6.59% | -2.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.77% | 2.90% | +1.87% |
Volatility
MLPR vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) has a higher volatility of 7.59% compared to USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) at 5.33%. This indicates that MLPR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPR | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.59% | 5.33% | +2.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.35% | 11.05% | +4.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.95% | 14.23% | +6.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.38% | 19.45% | +9.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.70% | 23.16% | +10.54% |
MLPR vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPR vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison
MLPR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.64%, more than UMI's 6.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 9.64% | 10.85% | 9.57% | 10.08% | 7.49% | 10.69% | 4.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 6.02% | 6.23% | 4.39% | 4.67% | 4.36% | 3.00% | 2.18% | 2.47% | 2.48% | 0.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MLPR and UMI have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MLPR has higher volatility (7.59%) compared to UMI (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPR dropped -48.98% vs UMI's -48.08%.
On 5-year performance, MLPR leads with 24.78% vs 20.20% for UMI. On fees, UMI is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, UMI has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MLPR has performed better with a 24.78% return vs 20.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UMI is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MLPR.
MLPR has the higher dividend yield at 9.64%, compared with 6.02% for UMI.
MLPR is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MLPR and 0.85% for UMI.
UMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.11), 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 MLPR and UMI
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