NBFC vs. CARY
NBFC (Flexible Credit Income ETF) and CARY (Angel Oak Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBFC returned 8.01% vs 6.94% for CARY. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NBFC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for CARY.
Performance
NBFC vs. CARY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NBFC achieves a 1.32% return, which is significantly lower than CARY's 1.74% return.
NBFC
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- 1Y
- 8.01%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CARY
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 1.74%
- 6M
- 2.13%
- 1Y
- 6.94%
- 3Y*
- 7.35%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBFC vs. CARY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 1.32% | 9.63% | 4.58% |
CARY Angel Oak Income ETF | 1.74% | 7.54% | 2.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBFC and CARY is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2024 | 0.47 |
The correlation between NBFC and CARY shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (all time) to 0.65 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
NBFC vs. CARY — Risk / Return Rank
NBFC
CARY
NBFC vs. CARY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) and Angel Oak Income ETF (CARY). 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.
| NBFC | CARY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.51 | 3.96 | -1.45 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.89 | 6.28 | -2.39 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.89 | -0.38 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.91 | 5.45 | -2.54 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.32 | 23.64 | -11.32 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NBFC | CARY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.51 | 3.96 | -1.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.23 | 2.65 | -0.42 |
Drawdowns
NBFC vs. CARY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBFC drawdown since its inception was -3.99%, which is greater than CARY's maximum drawdown of -1.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFC and CARY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBFC | CARY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -1.96% | -2.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | -1.28% | -1.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.25% | -0.14% | -0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.44% | -0.33% | -0.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.65% | 0.29% | +0.36% |
Volatility
NBFC vs. CARY - Volatility Comparison
Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) has a higher volatility of 1.05% compared to Angel Oak Income ETF (CARY) at 0.56%. This indicates that NBFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CARY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBFC | CARY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.05% | 0.56% | +0.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.46% | 1.30% | +1.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.21% | 1.76% | +1.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 2.74% | +0.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 2.74% | +0.89% |
NBFC vs. CARY - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBFC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CARY's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBFC vs. CARY - Dividend Comparison
NBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.33%, more than CARY's 5.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CARY Angel Oak Income ETF | 5.93% | 6.13% | 6.10% | 6.38% | 0.48% |
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 7.33% | 7.71% | 3.95% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBFC and CARY have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NBFC has higher volatility (1.05%) compared to CARY (0.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBFC dropped -3.99% vs CARY's -1.96%.
On 1-year performance, NBFC leads with 8.01% vs 6.94% for CARY. On fees, NBFC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CARY has been the lower-risk option at 0.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, NBFC has performed better with a 8.01% return vs 6.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NBFC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CARY.
NBFC has the higher dividend yield at 7.33%, compared with 5.93% for CARY.
They also come from different issuers: Neuberger and Angel Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for NBFC and 0.80% for CARY.
CARY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.96 vs 2.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for NBFC and CARY
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