CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE
CIB0.DE (VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A) and NBTK.DE (Invesco Nasdaq Biotech UCITS ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - CIB0.DE tracks the MVIS Global Bionic Healthcare ESG while NBTK.DE tracks the Nasdaq Biotechnology. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CIB0.DE returned -8.20%/yr vs 9.94%/yr for NBTK.DE. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIB0.DE charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for NBTK.DE.
Performance
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIB0.DE achieves a -14.18% return, which is significantly lower than NBTK.DE's 4.27% return.
CIB0.DE
- 1D
- 3.05%
- 1M
- 1.36%
- YTD
- -14.18%
- 6M
- -17.46%
- 1Y
- -15.36%
- 3Y*
- -8.20%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBTK.DE
- 1D
- 2.92%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 4.27%
- 6M
- 3.76%
- 1Y
- 39.20%
- 3Y*
- 9.94%
- 5Y*
- 5.63%
- 10Y*
- —
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIB0.DE VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A | -14.18% | -10.00% | 5.16% | 2.09% | -1.65% |
NBTK.DE Invesco Nasdaq Biotech UCITS ETF | 4.27% | 18.60% | 4.57% | 2.51% | -3.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIB0.DE and NBTK.DE is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2022 | 0.49 |
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
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE — Risk / Return Rank
CIB0.DE
NBTK.DE
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A (CIB0.DE) and Invesco Nasdaq Biotech UCITS ETF (NBTK.DE). 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.
| CIB0.DE | NBTK.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 1.34 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.65 | 6.16 | -6.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.67 | 17.06 | -18.73 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CIB0.DE | NBTK.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.89 | 2.03 | -2.92 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.31 | 0.42 | -0.73 |
Drawdowns
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIB0.DE drawdown since its inception was -32.60%, which is greater than NBTK.DE's maximum drawdown of -30.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIB0.DE and NBTK.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIB0.DE | NBTK.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.60% | -30.99% | -1.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.47% | -6.24% | -17.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -32.60% | -29.35% | -3.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.26% | -1.44% | -26.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.72% | -10.62% | -0.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.08% | 2.26% | +6.82% |
Volatility
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A (CIB0.DE) and Invesco Nasdaq Biotech UCITS ETF (NBTK.DE) have volatilities of 6.42% and 6.41%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIB0.DE | NBTK.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.42% | 6.41% | +0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.62% | 14.11% | -1.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.03% | 19.00% | -1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.95% | 20.30% | -2.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.95% | 22.05% | -4.10% |
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIB0.DE has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than NBTK.DE's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIB0.DE vs. NBTK.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither CIB0.DE nor NBTK.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CIB0.DE and NBTK.DE have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NBTK.DE is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NBTK.DE is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CIB0.DE.
CIB0.DE tracks MVIS Global Bionic Healthcare ESG, while NBTK.DE tracks Nasdaq Biotechnology. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CIB0.DE and 0.40% for NBTK.DE.
Find the right allocation for CIB0.DE and NBTK.DE
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