ISVBF vs. NBCE

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and NBCE (Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF) are both China Equities funds. ISVBF is passively managed, while NBCE is actively managed. Over the past year, ISVBF returned -5.03% vs 65.21% for NBCE. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for NBCE.

Performance

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -14.08% return, which is significantly lower than NBCE's 32.28% return.

ISVBF

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -5.25%
• YTD: -14.08%
• 6M: -14.23%
• 1Y: -5.03%
• 3Y*: 8.21%
• 5Y*: -6.48%
• 10Y*: —

NBCE

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 7.77%
• YTD: 32.28%
• 6M: 32.59%
• 1Y: 65.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-14.08%	30.64%	18.96%	-4.72%
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	32.28%	39.08%	3.35%	-2.22%

Correlation

The correlation between ISVBF and NBCE is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 16, 2023	0.41

Return for Risk

ISVBF vs. NBCE — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 7
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 8
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 7

NBCE

NBCE Risk / Return Rank: 94
NBCE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
NBCE Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
NBCE Omega Ratio Rank: 93
NBCE Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
NBCE Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE). 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.

	ISVBF	NBCE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.16	3.22	-3.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.02	4.07	-4.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.56	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.23	7.10	-7.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.54	23.23	-23.77

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISVBF Sharpe Ratio is -0.16, which is lower than the NBCE Sharpe Ratio of 3.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISVBF and NBCE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, which is greater than NBCE's maximum drawdown of -28.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and NBCE.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISVBF	NBCE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.78%	-28.42%	-25.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.97%	-9.23%	-12.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-30.36%	-2.98%	-27.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.68%	-8.97%	-23.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.28%	2.82%	+6.46%

Volatility

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) is 8.48%, while Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE) has a volatility of 9.61%. This indicates that ISVBF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NBCE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISVBF	NBCE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.48%	9.61%	-1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.93%	15.72%	+11.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.96%	20.40%	+10.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.32%	24.38%	+5.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.15%	24.38%	+5.77%

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than NBCE's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISVBF vs. NBCE - Dividend Comparison

ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NBCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	1.00%	1.32%	1.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISVBF and NBCE in my portfolio?

ISVBF and NBCE have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISVBF or NBCE?

NBCE has higher volatility (9.61%) compared to ISVBF (8.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs NBCE's -28.42%.

Which ETF is better, ISVBF or NBCE?

On 1-year performance, NBCE leads with 65.21% vs -5.03% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 8.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ISVBF or NBCE?

Over the 1-year period, NBCE has performed better with a 65.21% return vs -5.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISVBF or NBCE?

ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for NBCE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ISVBF or NBCE?

NBCE has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between ISVBF and NBCE?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Neuberger Berman. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.74% for NBCE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBCE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.22 vs -0.16), 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.