NBDS vs. THNQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

NBDS (Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF) and THNQ (ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NBDS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman, while THNQ is a Artificial Intelligence fund tracking the ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence Index. NBDS is actively managed, while THNQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NBDS returned 17.53%/yr vs 30.82%/yr for THNQ. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. NBDS charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for THNQ.

Performance

NBDS vs. THNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBDS achieves a 9.49% return, which is significantly lower than THNQ's 33.15% return.

NBDS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -5.09%
• 6M: 14.36%
• YTD: 9.49%
• 1Y: 15.81%
• 3Y*: 17.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.66%

THNQ

• 1D: 1.65%
• 1M: -4.13%
• 6M: 31.35%
• YTD: 33.15%
• 1Y: 55.63%
• 3Y*: 30.82%
• 5Y*: 14.49%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.75%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
NBDS Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF	$2.98M	$1.83M	$2.43M
THNQ ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF	$1.82M	$1.71M	$2.47M

NBDS vs. THNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NBDS Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF	9.49%	19.58%	17.97%	38.55%	-24.78%
THNQ ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF	33.15%	29.83%	18.82%	56.81%	-26.15%

Correlation

The correlation between NBDS and THNQ is 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2022	0.91

The correlation between NBDS and THNQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

NBDS vs. THNQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NBDS	THNQ
Technology	60.3%	78.5%
Healthcare	15.5%	3.8%
Industrials	8.0%	1.3%
Financial Services	5.3%	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	5.2%	11.1%
Communication Services	3.4%	4.3%
Utilities	2.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

NBDS vs. THNQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NBDS

NBDS Risk / Return Rank: 22
NBDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
NBDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
NBDS Omega Ratio Rank: 23
NBDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
NBDS Martin Ratio Rank: 21

THNQ

THNQ Risk / Return Rank: 71
THNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
THNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
THNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 66
THNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
THNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 66

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NBDS vs. THNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) and ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ). 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	THNQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	1.70	-1.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.86	2.26	-1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.28	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	2.78	-2.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.47	7.92	-6.46

NBDS vs. THNQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBDS Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the THNQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBDS and THNQ, 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. THNQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBDS drawdown since its inception was -29.93%, smaller than the maximum THNQ drawdown of -50.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBDS and THNQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBDS	THNQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.93%	-50.56%	+20.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.96%	-18.39%	-5.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.51%	-29.88%	+1.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-50.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.57%	-9.60%	+1.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.37%	-14.88%	+5.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.38%	6.45%	+2.93%

Volatility

NBDS vs. THNQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) is 9.01%, while ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF (THNQ) has a volatility of 9.75%. This indicates that NBDS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than THNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBDS	THNQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.01%	9.75%	-0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.32%	24.75%	-1.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.95%	30.08%	-2.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.03%	29.80%	-1.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.03%	28.97%	-0.94%

NBDS vs. THNQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBDS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than THNQ's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBDS vs. THNQ - Dividend Comparison

NBDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, more than THNQ's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
NBDS Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF	0.35%	0.38%
THNQ ROBO Global Artificial Intelligence ETF	0.15%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBDS and THNQ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, NBDS and THNQ 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 THNQ?

THNQ has higher volatility (9.75%) compared to NBDS (9.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBDS dropped -29.93% vs THNQ's -50.56%.

Which ETF is better, NBDS or THNQ?

On 3-year performance, THNQ leads with 30.82% vs 17.53% for NBDS. On fees, NBDS is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, NBDS has been the lower-risk option at 9.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBDS or THNQ?

Over the 3-year period, THNQ has performed better with a 30.82% return vs 17.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBDS or THNQ?

NBDS is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for THNQ.

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

NBDS has the higher dividend yield at 0.35%, compared with 0.15% for THNQ.

What is the main difference between NBDS and THNQ?

NBDS is categorized as Technology Equities, while THNQ is Artificial Intelligence. They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for NBDS and 0.68% for THNQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

THNQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 0.49), 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.