NBDS vs. FTEC

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

NBDS (Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF) and FTEC (Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. NBDS is actively managed, while FTEC is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NBDS returned 17.78%/yr vs 27.36%/yr for FTEC. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NBDS charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FTEC.

Performance

NBDS vs. FTEC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF (FTEC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBDS achieves a 11.88% return, which is significantly lower than FTEC's 21.67% return.

NBDS

• 1D: -3.52%
• 1M: -2.78%
• 6M: 10.60%
• YTD: 11.88%
• 1Y: 16.87%
• 3Y*: 17.78%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTEC

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: -2.95%
• 6M: 20.75%
• YTD: 21.67%
• 1Y: 35.73%
• 3Y*: 27.36%
• 5Y*: 18.86%
• 10Y*: 24.23%

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

NBDS vs. FTEC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NBDS Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF	11.88%	19.58%	17.97%	38.55%	-24.78%
FTEC Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF	21.67%	22.11%	29.40%	53.30%	-20.00%

Correlation

The correlation between NBDS and FTEC is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2022	0.92

The correlation between NBDS and FTEC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

NBDS vs. FTEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NBDS	FTEC
Technology	60.7%	98.6%
Healthcare	9.5%	-
Industrials	8.0%	0.5%
Financial Services	5.6%	0.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	0.0%
Utilities	2.1%	-
Communication Services	1.5%	0.0%
Basic Materials	-	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	0.3%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

NBDS vs. FTEC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBDS

NBDS Risk / Return Rank: 21
NBDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
NBDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
NBDS Omega Ratio Rank: 21
NBDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
NBDS Martin Ratio Rank: 20

FTEC

FTEC Risk / Return Rank: 51
FTEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FTEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
FTEC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
FTEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FTEC Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

NBDS vs. FTEC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF (FTEC). 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.

	NBDS	FTEC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.62	1.53	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	2.03	-1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.26	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.71	2.21	-1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.83	6.36	-4.53

NBDS vs. FTEC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBDS Sharpe Ratio is 0.62, which is lower than the FTEC Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBDS and FTEC, 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

NBDS vs. FTEC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBDS drawdown since its inception was -29.93%, smaller than the maximum FTEC drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBDS and FTEC.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBDS	FTEC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.93%	-34.95%	+5.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.96%	-16.26%	-7.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.51%	-27.30%	-1.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.95%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.58%	-9.13%	+2.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.39%	-5.58%	-3.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.23%	5.63%	+3.60%

Volatility

NBDS vs. FTEC - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) has a higher volatility of 9.78% compared to Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF (FTEC) at 8.65%. This indicates that NBDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTEC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBDS	FTEC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.78%	8.65%	+1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.83%	19.55%	+3.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.43%	23.50%	+3.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.02%	25.75%	+2.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.02%	24.90%	+3.12%

NBDS vs. FTEC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBDS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FTEC's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBDS vs. FTEC - Dividend Comparison

NBDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than FTEC's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FTEC Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF	0.37%	0.43%	0.49%	0.77%	0.93%	0.63%	0.83%	1.03%	1.20%	0.96%	1.25%	1.27%
NBDS Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF	0.34%	0.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBDS and FTEC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, NBDS and FTEC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NBDS or FTEC?

NBDS has higher volatility (9.78%) compared to FTEC (8.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBDS dropped -29.93% vs FTEC's -34.95%.

Which ETF is better, NBDS or FTEC?

On 3-year performance, FTEC leads with 27.36% vs 17.78% for NBDS. On fees, FTEC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FTEC has been the lower-risk option at 8.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBDS or FTEC?

Over the 3-year period, FTEC has performed better with a 27.36% return vs 17.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBDS or FTEC?

FTEC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for NBDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBDS or FTEC?

FTEC has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.34% for NBDS.

What is the main difference between NBDS and FTEC?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for NBDS and 0.08% for FTEC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTEC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 0.62), 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.