9 months since inception
Dec 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026+19.72%cumulative total return
#11 of 99 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (99 − 1)≈ 0.1020
Armchair Insider
MLPI NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income
Only the current NEOS fund history is used; excludes the retired UBS ETN with the same ticker.
Total-return consistency rank#7100 eligible investments
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1020. Lower scores rank first.
Hypothetical investment
Growth of $10,000
Dividends reinvested · no additional contributions
MLPI would be worth$11,972Available history · 5Y requested · as of Sep 18, 2026
S&P 500 (SPY)$11,381Same $10,000 · same dates
Total gain / loss+$1,972+19.7% total return
MLPIS&P 500 (SPY)
Dec 18, 2025 · $10,000 investedSep 18, 2026
The selected period exceeds this investment’s age; the chart shows its complete available trading history. Based on adjusted market prices through the latest available completed session, before personal taxes and trading costs.
Checking the latest completed session…
Market performance
Total return
Price movement plus reinvested distributions, compared with SPY.
+19.7% over available history
9 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+19.7%Since inception#11 return rank · 99 peers
Price30% of return+6.0%
Dividend70% of return+13.7%
9 MONTHS TOTAL RETURN+19.7%Since inception#11 return rank · 99 peers
Price30% of return+6.0%
Dividend70% of return+13.7%
Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.
Provisional rank · under 1 year of history.
Dec 18, 2025Sep 18, 2026
Total return+19.72%
S&P 500 (SPY)+13.81%
Annualized returnUnder 1 year
Largest drawdown-5.94%
Transparent ranking calculation
Why MLPI ranks #7
Total-return consistency · Compared with the active Armchair Insider collection through Sep 18, 2026.
9 months since inception
Dec 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026+19.72%cumulative total return
#11 of 99 eligible investments on these dates.
10 investments have a higher return.
(11 − 1) ÷ (99 − 1)≈ 0.1020
Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.
Use the weaker period
max(0.1020, 0.1020)≈ 0.1020
Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.
Add the two period scores
0.1020 + 0.1020≈ 0.2041
The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.
MLPI places #7 of 100
Both periods have the same standing, setting a ranking score of 0.1020. Lower scores rank first.
Remaining tie-breaks & return formula
If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.
For MLPI, the longer total-return tie-break is +19.7233% cumulative (under one year); the recent total-return tie-break is +19.7233% cumulative.
Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.
Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.
Provisional rank. This investment has less than one year of history, so both periods use the same available dates. They are not two independent track records.
This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.
This explains the collection’s default ranking. Search, category filters and chart periods do not change it; choosing another sort changes the list order. This is Income Lens’s calculation, not a score published by the strategy creator.
Armchair Insider