NBCE vs. ISVBF

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

NBCE (Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds. NBCE is actively managed, while ISVBF is passively managed. Over the past year, NBCE returned 47.02% vs -2.60% for ISVBF. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NBCE charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.

Performance

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBCE achieves a 18.65% return, which is significantly higher than ISVBF's -11.89% return.

NBCE

• 1D: -3.59%
• 1M: -3.29%
• 6M: 13.41%
• YTD: 18.65%
• 1Y: 47.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISVBF

• 1D: -1.30%
• 1M: -3.57%
• 6M: -17.04%
• YTD: -11.89%
• 1Y: -2.60%
• 3Y*: 7.37%
• 5Y*: -6.00%
• 10Y*: —

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

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	18.65%	39.08%	3.35%	-2.22%
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	-11.89%	30.64%	18.96%	-4.72%

Correlation

The correlation between NBCE and ISVBF is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 16, 2023	0.40

Return for Risk

NBCE vs. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBCE

NBCE Risk / Return Rank: 83
NBCE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
NBCE Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
NBCE Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NBCE Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
NBCE Martin Ratio Rank: 88

ISVBF

ISVBF Risk / Return Rank: 8
ISVBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
ISVBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
ISVBF Omega Ratio Rank: 9
ISVBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
ISVBF Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	NBCE	ISVBF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	-0.08	+2.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.76	0.10	+2.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.01	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.64	-0.11	+3.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.66	-0.25	+14.91

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBCE Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is higher than the ISVBF Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBCE and ISVBF, 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

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	NBCE	ISVBF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.42%	-53.78%	+25.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.98%	-24.14%	+11.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.14%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-52.51%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.98%	-28.59%	+15.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.92%	-32.65%	+23.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	10.37%	-7.15%

Volatility

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE) has a higher volatility of 11.84% compared to iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) at 7.77%. This indicates that NBCE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISVBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBCE	ISVBF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.84%	7.77%	+4.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.07%	27.10%	-9.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.28%	31.44%	-9.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.79%	30.44%	-5.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.79%	30.13%	-5.34%

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

NBCE vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison

NBCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, while ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	1.12%	1.32%	1.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBCE and ISVBF in my portfolio?

NBCE and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBCE or ISVBF?

NBCE has higher volatility (11.84%) compared to ISVBF (7.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBCE dropped -28.42% vs ISVBF's -53.78%.

Which ETF is better, NBCE or ISVBF?

On 1-year performance, NBCE leads with 47.02% vs -2.60% for ISVBF. On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ISVBF has been the lower-risk option at 7.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBCE or ISVBF?

Over the 1-year period, NBCE has performed better with a 47.02% return vs -2.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBCE or ISVBF?

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

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

NBCE has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.

What is the main difference between NBCE and ISVBF?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBCE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs -0.08), 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.