Screener
AMUB vs MLPR
UBS ETRACS Alerian MLP Index ETN Series B vs ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN
Key differences
- MLPR costs 0.80% less per year.
- AMUB is significantly larger than MLPR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- AMUB follows a index tracking strategy; MLPR uses leveraged.
- Over the last 3 years, MLPR has delivered higher annualized returns.
- AMUB has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| AMUB | MLPR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.80% | 0.00% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $39M | $11M |
| Since | 2015 | 2020 |
| Dividend yield | 4.14% | 8.85% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | leveraged |
| CAGR 1Y | +24.9% | +35.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +23.4% | +32.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | +21.5% | +30.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.17 | 1.13 |
| Volatility 1Y | 13.53% | 20.56% |
| Max drawdown | -73.46% | -48.99% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to AMUB and MLPR
Explore further