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

Performance

NBDS vs. IETC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and iShares Evolved U.S. Technology ETF (IETC). 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 18.54% return, which is significantly higher than IETC's 16.36% return.


NBDS

1D
1.20%
1M
16.93%
YTD
18.54%
6M
17.41%
1Y
35.71%
3Y*
23.36%
5Y*
10Y*

IETC

1D
-0.13%
1M
14.36%
YTD
16.36%
6M
15.89%
1Y
34.78%
3Y*
31.47%
5Y*
19.15%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NBDS vs. IETC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
NBDS
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF
18.54%19.58%17.97%38.55%-24.65%
IETC
iShares Evolved U.S. Technology ETF
16.36%19.56%37.57%54.35%-23.36%

Correlation

The correlation between NBDS and IETC is 0.89, 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

0.89

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

0.90

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

0.92

The correlation between NBDS and IETC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

NBDS vs. IETC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NBDS
IETC

Technology

65.4%
79.1%

Healthcare

9.1%
0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
4.7%

Industrials

5.8%
3.7%

Financial Services

5.7%
3.1%

Communication Services

4.4%
8.4%

Utilities

3.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Real Estate

-

0.7%

Technology

NBDS
65.4%
IETC
79.1%

Healthcare

NBDS
9.1%
IETC
0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

NBDS
6.5%
IETC
4.7%

Industrials

NBDS
5.8%
IETC
3.7%

Financial Services

NBDS
5.7%
IETC
3.1%

Communication Services

NBDS
4.4%
IETC
8.4%

Utilities

NBDS
3.1%
IETC

-

Basic Materials

NBDS

-

IETC

-

Consumer Defensive

NBDS

-

IETC

-

Energy

NBDS

-

IETC

-

Real Estate

NBDS

-

IETC
0.7%

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. IETC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBDS
NBDS Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
NBDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NBDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
NBDS Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
NBDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
NBDS Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

IETC
IETC Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
IETC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IETC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
IETC Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IETC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
IETC Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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. IETC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and iShares Evolved U.S. Technology ETF (IETC). 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.


NBDSIETCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.46

1.67

-0.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.99

2.23

-0.24

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.28

-0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.51

1.69

-0.18

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.97

4.77

-0.80

NBDS vs. IETC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBDS Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the IETC Sharpe Ratio of 1.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBDS and IETC, 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


NBDSIETCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

1.67

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.88

-0.36

Drawdowns

NBDS vs. IETC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBDS drawdown since its inception was -29.81%, smaller than the maximum IETC drawdown of -38.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBDS and IETC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NBDSIETCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.81%

-38.48%

+8.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.96%

-21.19%

-2.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.51%

-25.17%

-3.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.13%

+0.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.53%

-8.14%

-1.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.13%

7.51%

+1.62%

Volatility

NBDS vs. IETC - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) has a higher volatility of 8.81% compared to iShares Evolved U.S. Technology ETF (IETC) at 5.80%. This indicates that NBDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IETC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NBDSIETCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.81%

5.80%

+3.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.41%

16.34%

+3.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.53%

20.93%

+3.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.65%

24.52%

+3.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.65%

25.37%

+2.28%

NBDS vs. IETC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBDS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IETC's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

NBDS vs. IETC - Dividend Comparison

NBDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than IETC's 0.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
IETC
iShares Evolved U.S. Technology ETF
0.33%0.38%0.52%0.79%0.92%0.73%0.48%0.95%1.27%
NBDS
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF
0.32%0.38%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NBDS and IETC have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NBDS has higher volatility (8.81%) compared to IETC (5.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBDS dropped -29.81% vs IETC's -38.48%.

On 3-year performance, IETC leads with 31.47% vs 23.36% for NBDS. On fees, IETC is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IETC has been the lower-risk option at 5.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, IETC has performed better with a 31.47% return vs 23.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IETC is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for NBDS.

NBDS and IETC have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.32%.

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for NBDS and 0.18% for IETC.

IETC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs 1.46), 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 IETC

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