MLPX vs. USNG
MLPX (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. MLPX is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, MLPX returned 26.87% vs 32.07% for USNG. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MLPX charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.
Performance
MLPX vs. USNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MLPX having a 26.75% return and USNG slightly lower at 25.43%.
MLPX
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 2.91%
- 6M
- 17.40%
- YTD
- 26.75%
- 1Y
- 26.87%
- 3Y*
- 26.63%
- 5Y*
- 22.92%
- 10Y*
- 12.35%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.35%
USNG
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- -3.22%
- 6M
- 12.87%
- YTD
- 25.43%
- 1Y
- 32.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 31.38%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $36.85M | $35.99M | $31.05M | |
| $437.77K | $274.58K | $158.86K |
MLPX vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF | 26.75% | 2.09% |
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 25.43% | 10.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPX and USNG is 0.60, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025 | 0.65 |
The correlation between MLPX and USNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.
MLPX vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MLPX
USNG
Energy
Utilities
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Energy
MLPX
USNG
Utilities
MLPX
USNG
Industrials
MLPX
USNG
Basic Materials
MLPX
-
USNG
Communication Services
MLPX
-
USNG
-
Consumer Cyclical
MLPX
-
USNG
-
Consumer Defensive
MLPX
-
USNG
-
Financial Services
MLPX
-
USNG
Healthcare
MLPX
-
USNG
-
Real Estate
MLPX
-
USNG
-
Technology
MLPX
-
USNG
-
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
MLPX vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank
MLPX
USNG
MLPX vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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.
| MLPX | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.30 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.27 | 2.62 | +0.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.63 | 10.67 | -3.03 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MLPX vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPX drawdown since its inception was -70.67%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -11.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPX and USNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPX | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.67% | -11.93% | -58.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.18% | -11.93% | +3.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.77% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.72% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -64.70% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.27% | -8.47% | +5.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.47% | -1.85% | -14.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.49% | 2.93% | +0.56% |
Volatility
MLPX vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) is 5.46%, while Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a volatility of 6.49%. This indicates that MLPX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPX | USNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.46% | 6.49% | -1.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.52% | 13.82% | -1.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.68% | 17.46% | -1.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.90% | 17.29% | +2.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.14% | 17.29% | +8.85% |
MLPX vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPX has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPX vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison
MLPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.05%, more than USNG's 1.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF | 4.05% | 4.88% | 4.30% | 5.22% | 5.23% | 5.98% | 8.32% | 5.78% | 5.77% | 4.36% | 5.50% | 4.81% |
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF | 1.54% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MLPX and USNG have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
USNG has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to MLPX (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPX dropped -70.67% vs USNG's -11.93%.
On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 32.07% vs 26.87% for MLPX. On fees, MLPX is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, MLPX has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 32.07% return vs 26.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MLPX is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for USNG.
MLPX has the higher dividend yield at 4.05%, compared with 1.54% for USNG.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MLPX and 0.59% for USNG.
USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.71), 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 MLPX and USNG
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