NBCE vs. KTEC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NBCE (Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF) and KTEC (KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF) are both China Equities funds. NBCE is actively managed, while KTEC is passively managed. Over the past year, NBCE returned 62.13% vs -8.17% for KTEC. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBCE charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for KTEC.

Performance

NBCE vs. KTEC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE) and KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBCE achieves a 25.89% return, which is significantly higher than KTEC's -11.17% return.

NBCE

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 8.36%
• YTD: 25.89%
• 6M: 30.43%
• 1Y: 62.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KTEC

• 1D: -3.20%
• 1M: -0.29%
• YTD: -11.17%
• 6M: -12.80%
• 1Y: -8.17%
• 3Y*: 7.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NBCE vs. KTEC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	25.89%	39.08%	3.35%	-2.22%
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	-11.17%	21.01%	16.13%	-2.37%

Correlation

The correlation between NBCE and KTEC is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2023	0.70

The correlation between NBCE and KTEC shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.70 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NBCE vs. KTEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NBCE	KTEC
Technology	28.7%	21.3%
Industrials	17.3%	-
Financial Services	15.2%	-
Basic Materials	13.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	48.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	-
Healthcare	4.6%	2.5%
Energy	3.5%	-
Utilities	1.7%	-
Communication Services	1.2%	27.6%
Real Estate	0.9%	-

Return for Risk

NBCE vs. KTEC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBCE

NBCE Risk / Return Rank: 92
NBCE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
NBCE Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
NBCE Omega Ratio Rank: 90
NBCE Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
NBCE Martin Ratio Rank: 92

KTEC

KTEC Risk / Return Rank: 6
KTEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
KTEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
KTEC Omega Ratio Rank: 6
KTEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
KTEC Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. KTEC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE) and KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC). 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.

	NBCE	KTEC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.36	-0.29	+3.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.29	-0.24	+4.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	0.97	+0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.77	-0.28	+7.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.69	-0.50	+23.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBCE vs. KTEC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBCE Sharpe Ratio is 3.36, which is higher than the KTEC Sharpe Ratio of -0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBCE and KTEC, 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

	NBCE	KTEC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.36	-0.29	+3.66
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.02	-0.24	+1.25

Drawdowns

NBCE vs. KTEC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBCE drawdown since its inception was -28.42%, smaller than the maximum KTEC drawdown of -66.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBCE and KTEC.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBCE	KTEC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.42%	-66.90%	+38.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.23%	-29.36%	+20.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	-43.95%	+43.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.13%	-43.97%	+34.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.75%	16.26%	-13.51%

Volatility

NBCE vs. KTEC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF (NBCE) is 7.20%, while KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF (KTEC) has a volatility of 10.62%. This indicates that NBCE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KTEC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBCE	KTEC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.20%	10.62%	-3.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.42%	20.56%	-7.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.59%	28.01%	-9.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.04%	43.22%	-19.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.04%	43.22%	-19.18%

NBCE vs. KTEC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBCE has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than KTEC's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBCE vs. KTEC - Dividend Comparison

NBCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than KTEC's 3.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
KTEC KraneShares Hang Seng TECH Index ETF	3.78%	3.36%	0.27%	0.81%	0.16%
NBCE Neuberger Berman China Equity ETF	1.05%	1.32%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBCE and KTEC in my portfolio?

NBCE and KTEC have a correlation of 0.60, 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 KTEC?

KTEC has higher volatility (10.62%) compared to NBCE (7.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBCE dropped -28.42% vs KTEC's -66.90%.

Which ETF is better, NBCE or KTEC?

On 1-year performance, NBCE leads with 62.13% vs -8.17% for KTEC. On fees, KTEC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, NBCE has been the lower-risk option at 7.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBCE or KTEC?

Over the 1-year period, NBCE has performed better with a 62.13% return vs -8.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBCE or KTEC?

KTEC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for NBCE.

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

KTEC has the higher dividend yield at 3.78%, compared with 1.05% for NBCE.

What is the main difference between NBCE and KTEC?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for NBCE and 0.69% for KTEC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBCE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs -0.29), 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.