NBFC vs. NBGX

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

NBFC (Flexible Credit Income ETF) and NBGX (Neuberger Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NBFC is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Neuberger, while NBGX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Neuberger. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBFC returned 4.93% vs 9.50% for NBGX. Their 0.52 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NBFC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.44%/yr for NBGX.

Performance

NBFC vs. NBGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) and Neuberger Growth ETF (NBGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBFC achieves a 1.39% return, which is significantly lower than NBGX's 3.18% return.

NBFC

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: -0.52%
• 6M: 0.65%
• YTD: 1.39%
• 1Y: 4.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.47%

NBGX

• 1D: 1.50%
• 1M: -0.85%
• 6M: 4.46%
• YTD: 3.18%
• 1Y: 9.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.18%

*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)
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF	$26.03K	$56.02K	$43.83K
NBGX Neuberger Growth ETF	$14.58K	$19.78K	$15.07K

NBFC vs. NBGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF	1.39%	9.63%	0.17%
NBGX Neuberger Growth ETF	3.18%	16.40%	-1.22%

Correlation

The correlation between NBFC and NBGX is 0.53, 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.	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.52

The correlation between NBFC and NBGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBFC vs. NBGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBFC

NBFC Risk / Return Rank: 71
NBFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
NBFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
NBFC Omega Ratio Rank: 78
NBFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
NBFC Martin Ratio Rank: 67

NBGX

NBGX Risk / Return Rank: 22
NBGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
NBGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
NBGX Omega Ratio Rank: 22
NBGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
NBGX Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

NBFC vs. NBGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) and Neuberger Growth ETF (NBGX). 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.

	NBFC	NBGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	0.50	+1.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	0.79	+1.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.10	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	0.52	+1.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.16	1.69	+6.47

NBFC vs. NBGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is higher than the NBGX Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBFC and NBGX, 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

NBFC vs. NBGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBFC drawdown since its inception was -3.99%, smaller than the maximum NBGX drawdown of -21.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFC and NBGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBFC	NBGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-21.55%	+17.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.77%	-14.86%	+12.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.66%	-3.66%	+3.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-3.85%	+3.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.67%	4.53%	-3.86%

Volatility

NBFC vs. NBGX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) is 0.73%, while Neuberger Growth ETF (NBGX) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that NBFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NBGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBFC	NBGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.73%	4.72%	-3.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.56%	12.09%	-9.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.22%	15.32%	-12.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.56%	19.79%	-16.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.56%	19.79%	-16.23%

NBFC vs. NBGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBFC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than NBGX's 0.44% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBFC vs. NBGX - Dividend Comparison

NBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.27%, more than NBGX's 0.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF	7.27%	7.71%	3.95%
NBGX Neuberger Growth ETF	0.40%	0.41%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBFC and NBGX in my portfolio?

NBFC and NBGX have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBFC or NBGX?

NBGX has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to NBFC (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBFC dropped -3.99% vs NBGX's -21.55%.

Which ETF is better, NBFC or NBGX?

On 1-year performance, NBGX leads with 9.50% vs 4.93% for NBFC. On fees, NBFC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, NBFC has been the lower-risk option at 0.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBFC or NBGX?

Over the 1-year period, NBGX has performed better with a 9.50% return vs 4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBFC or NBGX?

NBFC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.44% for NBGX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBFC or NBGX?

NBFC has the higher dividend yield at 7.27%, compared with 0.40% for NBGX.

What is the main difference between NBFC and NBGX?

NBFC is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while NBGX is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for NBFC and 0.44% for NBGX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 0.50), 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.