DV
Dividend Vision

ETF Comparison

MLPI vs SCHD: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF and Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Updated October 2, 2026

How these figures are calculated: methodology.

Best for

  • MLPIInvestors who want to maximize current income — roughly 14.72%, generated by selling options premium.
  • SCHDInvestors who want a quality-dividend tilt rather than the whole market.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.

MLPI has lagged SCHD over the year to date, posting a 13.00% total return against 20.89%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
SymbolYTD cumulativeSince Dec 2025Volatility Sharpe Sortino Max drawdown
MLPI13.00%16.08%13.1%1.111.68-8.6%
SCHD20.89%21.99%11.1%1.893.14-6.9%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of October 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Dec 2025” measures every fund from December 18, 2025 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the shared window since Dec 2025. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the shared window since Dec 2025) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Distribution rate and SEC yield

MetricMLPISCHD
Forward distribution rate14.72%3.26%
Trailing 12-month yield12.99%3.22%
30-day SEC yield3.47%—

Total return (price change plus reinvested distributions) is the Total returns section above. A 30-day SEC yield can sit far from the headline distribution rate; both numbers are the fund's own published fields.

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
MetricMLPISCHD
Full nameNEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETFSchwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
IssuerNEOSSchwab
Underlying indexMaster limited partnershipsDow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index
Last Close$51.17 as of October 2, 2026$32.72 as of October 2, 2026
Distribution rate14.72%3.26%
Trailing 12-month yield12.99%3.22%
30-day SEC yield3.47%—
Distribution Safety Score™ 79100
Safety-Adjusted Yield 11.63%3.26%
Expense ratio0.68%0.06%
AUM$46.4M$110B
Distribution frequencyMonthlyQuarterly
ObjectiveSeeks to deliver high monthly income with exposure to master limited partnerships through an overlay strategy.Seeks to track as closely as possible, before fees and expenses, the total return of the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index, which measures the performance of high dividend yielding stocks issued by U.S. companies with a record of consistently paying dividends, selected for fundamental strength relative to their peers based on financial ratios.
Asset classEquityEquity
Inception date12/18/202510/20/2011
Beta—0.56
Last dividend$0.6276$0.2665
Ex-dividend date09/16/202609/23/2026

Bottom lineChoose MLPI if you want to maximize current income — roughly 14.72%, generated by selling options premium. Choose SCHD if you want a quality-dividend tilt rather than the whole market. There's no free lunch: MLPI's payout comes from selling options, which caps upside and can erode the share price over time, while SCHD keeps full price exposure.

How the risk works

Read this before the income numbers below: the strategy mechanics on this page shape what those payouts can cost you.

  • Capped upside and premium dependence. MLPI generates income by selling options, which trades away part of a strong rally in exchange for premium. Distributions can include return of capital, and a payout the underlying assets cannot sustain shows up as NAV erosion over time — the big yield number is not free.

Learn the mechanics: Return of capital, explained · NAV erosion, explained

Model this comparison:
Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

NEOS
ETFs19
Total AUM$34.7B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

NEOS is known for developing specialized income-focused ETFs that employ strategies like covered calls, hedging, and enhanced yields across various asset classes. The firm manages 19 funds organized into nine distinct families, including offerings in equity high income, fixed income enhancement, digital assets, and alternative strategies, with popular tickers like SPYI (S&P 500 covered call), QQQI (Nasdaq-100 covered call), and QQQH (Nasdaq-100 hedged equity income). NEOS distinguishes itself in the ETF landscape through its emphasis on income generation and downside protection strategies rather than traditional growth approaches.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on MLPI.

See all NEOS ETFs
Schwab
ETFs33
Total AUM$612B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

Schwab is a major provider of low-cost, broad-based ETFs known for making investing accessible to individual investors through its discount brokerage platform. The issuer's fund lineup spans multiple categories including core index funds, dividend and income-focused strategies, factor-based approaches, international exposure, fixed income, and digital assets, with popular core holdings like SCHB (U.S. broad market) and SCHD (dividend appreciation) alongside more specialized thematic offerings. Schwab's ETF suite is characterized by its breadth across asset classes and investment styles, competitive expense ratios, and integration with its retail brokerage ecosystem.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on SCHD.

See all Schwab ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Quick verdict

MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) and SCHD (Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF) are both dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

MLPI offers the higher yield at 14.72% vs 3.26% for SCHD. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

SCHD is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.06% compared to 0.68%.

They have different reference exposures: MLPI is linked to Master limited partnerships while SCHD is linked to Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

SCHD is the larger fund by assets ($110B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Who should choose each?

Choose MLPI

NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF

  • Want to maximize current income — MLPI distributes roughly 14.72% from selling options premium, vs 3.26% for SCHD.
  • Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.

Choose SCHD

Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF

  • Want a quality-dividend tilt — screened payers rather than the broad index.
  • Want to keep costs low — a 0.06% expense ratio vs 0.68% for MLPI.

Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, MLPI would generate roughly $122.67 cash per distribution, while SCHD would produce $81.50 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates.

MLPI yield14.72%
SCHD yield3.26%
Cash diff on $10K$41.17

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, MLPI would cost approximately $680 in fees vs $60 for SCHD (simplified, not compounded). The $620.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

MLPI ER0.68%
SCHD ER0.06%

Strategy & risk

MLPI tracks Master limited partnerships with an options approach, while SCHD tracks Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index.

MLPI beta—
SCHD beta0.56

Fund details

MLPI is managed by NEOS (launched 12/18/2025) with $46.4M in assets. SCHD is managed by Schwab (launched 10/20/2011) with $110B in assets.

MLPI AUM$46.4M
SCHD AUM$110B
Ready to act?
Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Enjoyed this page?

Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend ETFs.

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution rate for MLPI and SCHD?

MLPI currently distributes 14.72% and SCHD 3.26%, based on fund data updated October 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is MLPI or SCHD better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. MLPI currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between MLPI and SCHD?

MLPI (NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) tracks Master limited partnerships with an options approach, while SCHD (Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF) tracks Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index. They are issued by NEOS and Schwab respectively.

Can I hold both MLPI and SCHD?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.

Is MLPI or SCHD safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — SCHD scores 100, MLPI scores 79, so SCHD's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee, and the leverage, options-income, or crypto caveats flagged on this page apply regardless of score.

Which has lower fees, MLPI or SCHD?

MLPI has an expense ratio of 0.68% while SCHD charges 0.06%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in MLPI vs SCHD generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in MLPI would generate roughly $122.67 cash per distribution ($1,472.00 annually). The same in SCHD would produce about $81.50 cash per distribution ($326.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, MLPI or SCHD?

MLPI has lagged SCHD over the year to date, posting a 13.00% total return against 20.89%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

More comparisons to explore

MLPI vs SCHD — at a glance

Generated October 3, 2026.

Overview

MLPI is a newly launched ETF that uses an options overlay strategy to generate high monthly income from master limited partnerships in energy infrastructure. SCHD is a broad large-cap dividend ETF tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index, focusing on established U.S. companies with consistent dividend-paying histories. The two differ fundamentally in yield source—MLPI pursues synthetic income through options strategies on MLPs, while SCHD relies on organic dividend yields from blue-chip dividend aristocrats.

How they differ

The biggest difference is asset class and income generation: MLPI targets energy MLPs with a 14.72% distribution rate via options overlay, whereas SCHD holds broad large-cap dividend stocks with a 3.26% yield. That 11.46%-percentage-point gap reflects MLPI's use of derivatives to enhance payouts rather than the underlying income of its holdings alone.

Third, SCHD has $110B in assets under management versus MLPI's $46.4M, a difference reflecting SCHD's 14 years track record against MLPI's launch date of 12/18/2025.

Who each is best for

MLPI: Fits investors seeking high monthly cash flow from energy infrastructure exposure and who are comfortable with options-based income strategies and the volatility of MLP units.

SCHD: Fits investors who prioritize capital stability alongside moderate income from established large-cap dividend payers and prefer a low-cost equity core holding with a long operating history.

Key risks to know

  • Options and overlay risk in MLPI. The fund's synthetic-income strategy depends on realizing gains from sold options and managing the gap between premium collection and the cost of equity exposure; underwriting losses or adverse volatility moves could compress the promised payout without reducing the fund's NAV accordingly.
  • NAV erosion at elevated distribution rates. MLPI's 14.72% payout is substantially higher than typical MLP dividends alone; if options premium declines or underlying MLP values fall, the fund may rely on return of capital to sustain distributions, eroding NAV over time.
  • MLP sector and commodity sensitivity. MLPI concentrates on energy infrastructure, which is sensitive to crude oil, natural gas, and refined products prices as well as to interest-rate changes that affect MLP unit valuations and borrowing costs.
  • Interest-rate exposure. Both funds' equity holdings are sensitive to rising rates, but MLPs' unit holders benefit from inflation-linked cash flows, which can partially offset rate headwinds that hurt traditional dividend stocks like those in SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.

Learn the method

The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.

How covered-call funds work How to read a fund's stats The covered-call opportunity cost

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener

These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.