UMI vs. AMUB
UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) and AMUB (ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B) are both exchange-traded funds - UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by USCF, while AMUB is a MLPs fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index. UMI is actively managed, while AMUB is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UMI returned 22.50%/yr vs 15.00%/yr for AMUB. Their 0.70 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. UMI charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for AMUB.
Performance
UMI vs. AMUB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMI achieves a 26.70% return, which is significantly higher than AMUB's 23.05% return.
UMI
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- 3.72%
- 6M
- 18.07%
- YTD
- 26.70%
- 1Y
- 28.25%
- 3Y*
- 26.23%
- 5Y*
- 22.50%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.58%
AMUB
- 1D
- 1.06%
- 1M
- 7.16%
- 6M
- 13.97%
- YTD
- 23.05%
- 1Y
- 20.12%
- 3Y*
- 15.25%
- 5Y*
- 15.00%
- 10Y*
- 3.58%
- ALL TIME*
- 0.51%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.17K | $7.30K | $19.86K | |
| $1.28M | $1.03M | $1.15M |
UMI vs. AMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 26.70% | 5.11% | 42.97% | 14.60% | 20.78% | 20.97% | -8.25% | 21.06% | -10.64% | 2.76% |
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 23.05% | 2.05% | 15.68% | 16.89% | 21.91% | 28.83% | -36.47% | -1.78% | -19.25% | 1.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMI and AMUB is 0.79, 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. | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2017 | 0.70 |
The correlation between UMI and AMUB shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (all time) to 0.87 (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
UMI vs. AMUB — Risk / Return Rank
UMI
AMUB
UMI vs. AMUB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) 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.
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.
| UMI | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.22 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.79 | 1.65 | +2.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.51 | 4.50 | +5.01 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UMI vs. AMUB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMI drawdown since its inception was -48.08%, smaller than the maximum AMUB drawdown of -79.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMI and AMUB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMI | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.08% | -79.46% | +31.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.50% | -11.02% | +3.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.08% | -17.22% | +0.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.05% | -20.58% | +0.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -78.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.00% | -1.28% | -0.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.53% | -28.87% | +22.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.98% | 4.36% | -1.38% |
Volatility
UMI vs. AMUB - Volatility Comparison
USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) has a higher volatility of 5.19% compared to ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B (AMUB) at 4.77%. This indicates that UMI'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
| UMI | AMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.19% | 4.77% | +0.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.67% | 11.09% | +0.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.59% | 14.47% | +0.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.35% | 19.86% | -0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.10% | 27.18% | -4.08% |
UMI vs. AMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMI has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than AMUB's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMI vs. AMUB - Dividend Comparison
UMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.80%, while AMUB has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMUB ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Class B | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 5.80% | 6.23% | 4.39% | 4.67% | 4.36% | 3.00% | 2.18% | 2.47% | 2.48% | 0.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMI and AMUB have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UMI has higher volatility (5.19%) compared to AMUB (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMI dropped -48.08% vs AMUB's -79.46%.
On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 22.50% vs 15.00% for AMUB. On fees, AMUB is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, AMUB has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 22.50% return vs 15.00%. 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 0.85% for UMI.
UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.80%, compared with 0.00% for AMUB.
UMI is categorized as Energy Equities, while AMUB is MLPs. They also come from different issuers: USCF and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for UMI and 0.80% for AMUB.
UMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.26), 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 UMI 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