PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NBDS vs. GINN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NBDS vs. GINN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBDS achieves a 17.73% return, which is significantly higher than GINN's 8.64% return.


NBDS

1D
-0.69%
1M
16.39%
YTD
17.73%
6M
15.50%
1Y
33.80%
3Y*
23.07%
5Y*
10Y*

GINN

1D
-1.29%
1M
5.38%
YTD
8.64%
6M
7.90%
1Y
25.65%
3Y*
19.95%
5Y*
6.82%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NBDS vs. GINN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
NBDS
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF
17.73%19.58%17.97%38.55%-24.65%
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
8.64%20.25%18.71%29.94%-22.40%

Correlation

The correlation between NBDS and GINN is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2022

0.88

The correlation between NBDS and GINN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

NBDS vs. GINN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NBDS
GINN

Technology

65.4%
32.4%

Healthcare

9.1%
18.6%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
14.6%

Industrials

5.8%
6.1%

Financial Services

5.7%
11.4%

Communication Services

4.4%
10.8%

Utilities

3.1%
1.9%

Basic Materials

-

0.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.0%

Energy

-

1.4%

Real Estate

-

0.8%

Technology

NBDS
65.4%
GINN
32.4%

Healthcare

NBDS
9.1%
GINN
18.6%

Consumer Cyclical

NBDS
6.5%
GINN
14.6%

Industrials

NBDS
5.8%
GINN
6.1%

Financial Services

NBDS
5.7%
GINN
11.4%

Communication Services

NBDS
4.4%
GINN
10.8%

Utilities

NBDS
3.1%
GINN
1.9%

Basic Materials

NBDS

-

GINN
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

NBDS

-

GINN
2.0%

Energy

NBDS

-

GINN
1.4%

Real Estate

NBDS

-

GINN
0.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

NBDS vs. GINN — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBDS
NBDS Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
NBDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NBDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
NBDS Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
NBDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
NBDS Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

GINN
GINN Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
GINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
GINN Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
GINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
GINN Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN). 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.


NBDSGINNDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.38

1.61

-0.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.90

2.25

-0.35

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.28

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.42

1.95

-0.54

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.71

7.06

-3.35

NBDS vs. GINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBDS Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the GINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBDS and GINN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NBDSGINNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.38

1.61

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.45

+0.07

Drawdowns

NBDS vs. GINN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBDS drawdown since its inception was -29.81%, smaller than the maximum GINN drawdown of -41.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBDS and GINN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NBDSGINNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.81%

-41.25%

+11.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.96%

-13.18%

-10.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.51%

-22.25%

-6.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.69%

-1.63%

+0.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.52%

-13.37%

+3.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.13%

3.64%

+5.49%

Volatility

NBDS vs. GINN - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) has a higher volatility of 8.88% compared to Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF (GINN) at 3.98%. This indicates that NBDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GINN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NBDSGINNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.88%

3.98%

+4.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.41%

12.04%

+7.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.54%

16.06%

+8.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.64%

21.33%

+6.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.64%

21.05%

+6.59%

NBDS vs. GINN - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBDS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than GINN's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

NBDS vs. GINN - Dividend Comparison

NBDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than GINN's 1.16% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
GINN
Goldman Sachs ETF Trust Goldman Sachs Innovate Equity ETF
1.16%1.26%1.26%1.01%0.69%0.67%0.07%
NBDS
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF
0.32%0.38%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NBDS and GINN have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NBDS has higher volatility (8.88%) compared to GINN (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBDS dropped -29.81% vs GINN's -41.25%.

On 3-year performance, NBDS leads with 23.07% vs 19.95% for GINN. On fees, GINN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GINN has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, NBDS has performed better with a 23.07% return vs 19.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GINN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for NBDS.

GINN has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.32% for NBDS.

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for NBDS and 0.50% for GINN.

GINN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.61 vs 1.38), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NBDS and GINN

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer