FTWO vs. NBET

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FTWO (Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF) and NBET (Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. FTWO is passively managed, while NBET is actively managed. Over the past year, FTWO returned 30.91% vs 27.14% for NBET. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FTWO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for NBET.

Performance

FTWO vs. NBET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) and Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTWO achieves a 10.90% return, which is significantly lower than NBET's 24.24% return.

FTWO

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -1.13%
• YTD: 10.90%
• 6M: 13.58%
• 1Y: 30.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NBET

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: 24.24%
• 6M: 21.82%
• 1Y: 27.14%
• 3Y*: 20.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTWO vs. NBET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	10.90%	43.06%	14.97%	1.46%
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	24.24%	5.87%	30.30%	4.28%

Correlation

The correlation between FTWO and NBET is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 1, 2023	0.56

Over the past year, the correlation between FTWO and NBET has dropped to 0.28 - well below their long-term average of 0.56, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FTWO vs. NBET - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FTWO	NBET
Industrials	32.2%	2.6%
Energy	29.1%	89.0%
Basic Materials	25.9%	0.9%
Utilities	11.7%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

FTWO vs. NBET — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FTWO

FTWO Risk / Return Rank: 49
FTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 44

NBET

NBET Risk / Return Rank: 59
NBET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
NBET Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
NBET Omega Ratio Rank: 49
NBET Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
NBET Martin Ratio Rank: 60

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FTWO vs. NBET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) 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.

	FTWO	NBET	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	1.87	-0.15
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	2.49	-0.16
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.31	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.69	3.99	-1.30
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.23	10.51	-3.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FTWO vs. NBET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTWO Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the NBET Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTWO and NBET, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FTWO	NBET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.72	1.87	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.31	0.73	+0.59

Drawdowns

FTWO vs. NBET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTWO drawdown since its inception was -18.17%, roughly equal to the maximum NBET drawdown of -18.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTWO and NBET.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTWO	NBET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.17%	-18.72%	+0.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.54%	-6.84%	-4.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.19%	-4.32%	-4.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.43%	-5.06%	+1.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.29%	2.59%	+1.70%

Volatility

FTWO vs. NBET - Volatility Comparison

Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) and Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET) have volatilities of 5.79% and 5.82%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	FTWO	NBET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.79%	5.82%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.59%	11.12%	+3.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.09%	14.62%	+3.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.23%	19.54%	-0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.23%	19.54%	-0.31%

FTWO vs. NBET - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTWO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than NBET's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FTWO vs. NBET - Dividend Comparison

FTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than NBET's 2.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	1.01%	1.02%	1.23%	0.59%	0.00%
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	2.34%	2.70%	2.43%	1.22%	0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTWO and NBET in my portfolio?

FTWO 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.

Which is riskier, FTWO or NBET?

NBET has higher volatility (5.82%) compared to FTWO (5.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTWO dropped -18.17% vs NBET's -18.72%.

Which ETF is better, FTWO or NBET?

On 1-year performance, FTWO leads with 30.91% vs 27.14% for NBET. On fees, FTWO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FTWO or NBET?

Over the 1-year period, FTWO has performed better with a 30.91% return vs 27.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FTWO or NBET?

FTWO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NBET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FTWO or NBET?

NBET has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 1.01% for FTWO.

What is the main difference between FTWO and NBET?

They also come from different issuers: Strive and Neuberger Berman. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FTWO and 0.65% for NBET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.72), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.