BTOT vs. NBET
BTOT (iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF) and NBET (Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BTOT is a Total Bond Market fund tracking the Bloomberg US Total Fixed Income Market Index, while NBET is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman. BTOT is passively managed, while NBET is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.28, they often move in opposite directions. BTOT charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for NBET.
Performance
BTOT vs. NBET - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BTOT achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than NBET's 20.80% return.
BTOT
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.66%
- YTD
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 0.75%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBET
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- -5.87%
- YTD
- 20.80%
- 6M
- 20.90%
- 1Y
- 23.09%
- 3Y*
- 19.86%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BTOT vs. NBET - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BTOT iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF | 0.62% | 0.12% |
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF | 20.80% | -1.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between BTOT and NBET is -0.28, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025 | -0.28 |
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
BTOT vs. NBET — Risk / Return Rank
BTOT
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NBET
BTOT vs. NBET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF (BTOT) and Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET). 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.
| BTOT | NBET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.26 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.90 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.90 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BTOT vs. NBET - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BTOT drawdown since its inception was -2.36%, smaller than the maximum NBET drawdown of -18.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTOT and NBET.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BTOT | NBET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.36% | -18.72% | +16.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.00% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.96% | -6.98% | +6.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.79% | -5.07% | +4.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.93% | — |
Volatility
BTOT vs. NBET - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BTOT | NBET | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.77% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.00% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.70% | 14.66% | -10.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.70% | 19.48% | -15.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.70% | 19.48% | -15.78% |
BTOT vs. NBET - Expense Ratio Comparison
BTOT has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than NBET's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
BTOT vs. NBET - Dividend Comparison
BTOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, more than NBET's 1.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BTOT iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF | 2.12% | 0.22% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF | 1.71% | 2.70% | 2.43% | 1.22% | 0.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BTOT and NBET have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BTOT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BTOT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NBET.
BTOT has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 1.71% for NBET.
BTOT is categorized as Total Bond Market, while NBET is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Neuberger Berman. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for BTOT and 0.65% for NBET.
Find the right allocation for BTOT and NBET
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