MSFW vs. ATMP

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

MSFW (Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF) and ATMP (Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MSFW is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while ATMP is a MLPs fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Select MLP VWAP. MSFW is actively managed, while ATMP is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. MSFW charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for ATMP.

Performance

MSFW vs. ATMP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF (MSFW) and Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFW achieves a -21.45% return, which is significantly lower than ATMP's 25.34% return.

MSFW

• 1D: 1.71%
• 1M: 1.75%
• 6M: -15.87%
• YTD: -21.45%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ATMP

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: 6.25%
• 6M: 22.03%
• YTD: 25.34%
• 1Y: 25.46%
• 3Y*: 21.54%
• 5Y*: 18.48%
• 10Y*: 4.65%

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

MSFW vs. ATMP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MSFW Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF	-21.45%	-7.80%
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN	25.34%	0.34%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFW and ATMP 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2025	-0.04

Return for Risk

MSFW vs. ATMP — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSFW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ATMP

ATMP Risk / Return Rank: 65
ATMP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
ATMP Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
ATMP Omega Ratio Rank: 61
ATMP Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
ATMP Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

MSFW vs. ATMP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF (MSFW) and Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN (ATMP). 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.

	MSFW	ATMP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.75	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.47	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.30	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.10	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	7.25	—

Drawdowns

MSFW vs. ATMP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFW drawdown since its inception was -41.85%, smaller than the maximum ATMP drawdown of -80.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFW and ATMP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFW	ATMP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.85%	-80.86%	+39.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.30%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.48%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.98%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.08%	-1.90%	-30.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.41%	-30.91%	+11.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.53%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MSFW	ATMP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.20%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.60%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.58%	14.66%	+18.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.58%	22.10%	+11.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.58%	27.63%	+5.95%

MSFW vs. ATMP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than ATMP's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFW vs. ATMP - Dividend Comparison

MSFW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 48.07%, while ATMP has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
ATMP Barclays ETN+ Select MLP ETN	0.00%	0.00%
MSFW Roundhill MSFT WeeklyPay™ ETF	48.07%	20.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFW and ATMP in my portfolio?

MSFW and ATMP 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 ETF is better, MSFW or ATMP?

On fees, ATMP is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSFW or ATMP?

ATMP is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MSFW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSFW or ATMP?

MSFW has the higher dividend yield at 48.07%, compared with 0.00% for ATMP.

What is the main difference between MSFW and ATMP?

MSFW is categorized as Derivative Income, while ATMP is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Barclays Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MSFW and 0.95% for ATMP.