PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MTUL vs. AMUB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MTUL vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MTUL achieves a 60.22% return, which is significantly higher than AMUB's 16.97% return.


MTUL

1D
-0.74%
1M
27.97%
YTD
60.22%
6M
59.66%
1Y
75.85%
3Y*
59.49%
5Y*
19.95%
10Y*

AMUB

1D
-0.23%
1M
-2.08%
YTD
16.97%
6M
15.25%
1Y
15.77%
3Y*
15.80%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
3.05%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MTUL vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
MTUL
ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN
60.22%27.42%58.70%10.66%-37.97%7.00%
AMUB
ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B
16.97%2.05%15.68%16.89%21.91%17.20%

Correlation

The correlation between MTUL and AMUB 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.23

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2021

0.38

The correlation between MTUL and AMUB shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.40 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

MTUL vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MTUL
MTUL Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
MTUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUL Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUL Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

AMUB
AMUB Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
AMUB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMUB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMUB Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
AMUB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMUB Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MTUL vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) and ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB). 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.


MTULAMUBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.20

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.20

1.53

+1.66

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.78

4.52

+8.26

MTUL vs. AMUB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MTUL Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is higher than the AMUB Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MTUL and AMUB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MTULAMUBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.73

1.18

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.61

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.00

+0.41

Drawdowns

MTUL vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MTUL drawdown since its inception was -56.83%, smaller than the maximum AMUB drawdown of -79.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTUL and AMUB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MTULAMUBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.83%

-79.46%

+22.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.86%

-10.37%

-13.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.15%

-17.22%

-21.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.83%

-20.58%

-36.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-78.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-6.15%

+5.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.68%

-29.23%

+6.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.96%

3.51%

+2.45%

Volatility

MTUL vs. AMUB - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Momentum Factor TR ETN (MTUL) has a higher volatility of 20.29% compared to ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) at 5.40%. This indicates that MTUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MTULAMUBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

20.29%

5.40%

+14.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

37.63%

9.82%

+27.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

43.98%

13.60%

+30.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.81%

20.24%

+22.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

43.65%

27.09%

+16.56%

MTUL vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MTUL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than AMUB's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

MTUL vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison

Neither MTUL nor AMUB has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MTUL and AMUB 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.

MTUL has higher volatility (20.29%) compared to AMUB (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MTUL dropped -56.83% vs AMUB's -79.46%.

On 5-year performance, MTUL leads with 19.95% vs 12.34% for AMUB. On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, AMUB has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MTUL has performed better with a 19.95% return vs 12.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AMUB is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MTUL.

MTUL and AMUB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

MTUL is categorized as Momentum, while AMUB is MLPs. MTUL tracks MSCI USA Momentum Index, while AMUB tracks Alerian MLP Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MTUL and 0.80% for AMUB.

MTUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.18), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MTUL and AMUB

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