UCIB vs. MLPR
UCIB (ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B) and MLPR (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - UCIB is a Commodities fund tracking the UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while MLPR is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UCIB returned 12.44%/yr vs 32.44%/yr for MLPR. Their 0.34 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. UCIB charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for MLPR.
Performance
UCIB vs. MLPR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UCIB achieves a 23.75% return, which is significantly lower than MLPR's 38.78% return.
UCIB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 6.70%
- 6M
- 20.34%
- YTD
- 23.75%
- 1Y
- 32.01%
- 3Y*
- 11.45%
- 5Y*
- 12.44%
- 10Y*
- 10.54%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.77%
MLPR
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 10.57%
- 6M
- 25.92%
- YTD
- 38.78%
- 1Y
- 38.96%
- 3Y*
- 31.97%
- 5Y*
- 32.44%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 32.30%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $35.36K | $41.58K | $38.04K | |
| $582.36K | $305.70K | $123.29K |
UCIB vs. MLPR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 23.75% | 8.97% | 6.58% | -2.26% | 18.24% | 37.34% | 30.57% |
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 38.78% | 9.83% | 31.57% | 35.87% | 41.04% | 57.33% | -7.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between UCIB and MLPR is 0.30, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.23 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020 | 0.34 |
The correlation between UCIB and MLPR shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (3 years) to 0.34 (all time), 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
UCIB vs. MLPR — Risk / Return Rank
UCIB
MLPR
UCIB vs. MLPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) and ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR). 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.
| UCIB | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.30 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.42 | 2.74 | -1.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.13 | 7.79 | -3.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UCIB vs. MLPR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UCIB drawdown since its inception was -51.29%, roughly equal to the maximum MLPR drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UCIB and MLPR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UCIB | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.29% | -48.98% | -2.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.67% | -14.31% | -8.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.67% | -24.45% | +1.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.67% | -28.66% | +5.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.94% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.37% | -0.64% | -12.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.97% | -8.88% | -12.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.77% | 5.02% | +2.75% |
Volatility
UCIB vs. MLPR - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B (UCIB) has a higher volatility of 22.90% compared to ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) at 8.50%. This indicates that UCIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MLPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UCIB | MLPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 22.90% | 8.50% | +14.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.85% | 17.13% | +19.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.64% | 22.27% | +17.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.70% | 29.11% | -0.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.45% | 33.65% | -9.20% |
UCIB vs. MLPR - Expense Ratio Comparison
UCIB has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPR's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
UCIB vs. MLPR - Dividend Comparison
UCIB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MLPR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.88%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN | 8.88% | 10.85% | 9.57% | 10.08% | 7.49% | 10.69% | 4.21% |
UCIB ETRACS CMCI Total Return ETN Series B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UCIB and MLPR have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UCIB has higher volatility (22.90%) compared to MLPR (8.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UCIB dropped -51.29% vs MLPR's -48.98%.
On 5-year performance, MLPR leads with 32.44% vs 12.44% for UCIB. On fees, UCIB is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, MLPR has been the lower-risk option at 8.50%. 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 32.44% return vs 12.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UCIB is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MLPR.
MLPR has the higher dividend yield at 8.88%, compared with 0.00% for UCIB.
UCIB is categorized as Commodities, while MLPR is Leveraged Equities. UCIB tracks UBS Bloomberg CMCI Index, while MLPR tracks Alerian MLP Index (150%). Their fees differ too: 0.55% for UCIB and 0.95% for MLPR.
MLPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 0.81), 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 UCIB and MLPR
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