NBET vs. USNG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

NBET (Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBET returned 27.68% vs 32.07% for USNG. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NBET charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for USNG.

Performance

NBET vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with NBET having a 24.97% return and USNG slightly higher at 25.43%.

NBET

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 3.95%
• 6M: 14.68%
• YTD: 24.97%
• 1Y: 27.68%
• 3Y*: 19.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.70%

USNG

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: -3.22%
• 6M: 12.87%
• YTD: 25.43%
• 1Y: 32.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 31.38%

*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)
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	$197.04K	$221.77K	$179.90K
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	$437.77K	$274.58K	$158.86K

NBET vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	24.97%	3.29%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	25.43%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between NBET and USNG is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025	0.64

The correlation between NBET and USNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

NBET vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NBET	USNG
Energy	88.9%	80.9%
Utilities	8.6%	5.2%
Industrials	2.6%	7.7%
Basic Materials	0.9%	1.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	4.7%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

NBET vs. USNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBET

NBET Risk / Return Rank: 74
NBET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
NBET Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
NBET Omega Ratio Rank: 68
NBET Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
NBET Martin Ratio Rank: 66

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 76
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 72
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

NBET vs. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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.

	NBET	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.77	1.79	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.40	2.51	-0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.30	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.30	2.62	+0.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.03	10.67	-2.64

NBET vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBET Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBET and USNG, 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

NBET vs. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBET drawdown since its inception was -18.72%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -11.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBET and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBET	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.72%	-11.93%	-6.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.00%	-11.93%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.76%	-8.47%	+4.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.06%	-1.85%	-3.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.30%	2.93%	+0.37%

Volatility

NBET vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET) is 5.11%, while Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a volatility of 6.49%. This indicates that NBET experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBET	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.11%	6.49%	-1.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.79%	13.82%	-2.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.92%	17.46%	-2.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.43%	17.29%	+2.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.43%	17.29%	+2.14%

NBET vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBET has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than USNG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBET vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

NBET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than USNG's 1.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	2.41%	2.70%	2.43%	1.22%	0.87%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.54%	1.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBET and USNG in my portfolio?

NBET and USNG have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBET or USNG?

USNG has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to NBET (5.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBET dropped -18.72% vs USNG's -11.93%.

Which ETF is better, NBET or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 32.07% vs 27.68% for NBET. On fees, USNG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, NBET has been the lower-risk option at 5.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBET or USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 32.07% return vs 27.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBET or USNG?

USNG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NBET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBET or USNG?

NBET has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.54% for USNG.

What is the main difference between NBET and USNG?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for NBET and 0.59% for USNG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.77), 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.