NBFC vs. NBTR
NBFC (Flexible Credit Income ETF) and NBTR (Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NBFC is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Neuberger, while NBTR is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Neuberger. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBFC returned 8.01% vs 5.98% for NBTR. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBFC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.37%/yr for NBTR.
Performance
NBFC vs. NBTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NBFC achieves a 1.32% return, which is significantly higher than NBTR's 0.46% return.
NBFC
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- 1Y
- 8.01%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBTR
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 0.46%
- 6M
- 0.57%
- 1Y
- 5.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBFC vs. NBTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 1.32% | 9.63% | 0.17% |
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF | 0.46% | 8.07% | -0.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBFC and NBTR is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024 | 0.74 |
The correlation between NBFC and NBTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. NBTR — Risk / Return Rank
NBFC
NBTR
NBFC vs. NBTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) and Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR). 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 | NBTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.51 | 1.69 | +0.81 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.89 | 2.52 | +1.37 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.30 | +0.20 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.91 | 2.37 | +0.54 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.32 | 7.42 | +4.90 |
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 | NBTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.51 | 1.69 | +0.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.23 | 1.39 | +0.84 |
Drawdowns
NBFC vs. NBTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBFC drawdown since its inception was -3.99%, which is greater than NBTR's maximum drawdown of -2.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFC and NBTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBFC | NBTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -2.58% | -1.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | -2.54% | -0.23% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.25% | -1.18% | +0.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.44% | -0.59% | +0.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.65% | 0.81% | -0.16% |
Volatility
NBFC vs. NBTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) is 1.05%, while Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) has a volatility of 1.19%. This indicates that NBFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NBTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBFC | NBTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.05% | 1.19% | -0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.46% | 2.60% | -0.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.21% | 3.55% | -0.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 4.09% | -0.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 4.09% | -0.46% |
NBFC vs. NBTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBFC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than NBTR's 0.37% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBFC vs. NBTR - Dividend Comparison
NBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.33%, more than NBTR's 5.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 7.33% | 7.71% | 3.95% |
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF | 5.58% | 5.76% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBFC and NBTR have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NBTR has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to NBFC (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBFC dropped -3.99% vs NBTR's -2.58%.
On 1-year performance, NBFC leads with 8.01% vs 5.98% for NBTR. On fees, NBTR is cheaper at 0.37% per year. On volatility, NBFC has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. 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 5.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NBTR is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for NBFC.
NBFC has the higher dividend yield at 7.33%, compared with 5.58% for NBTR.
NBFC is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while NBTR is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for NBFC and 0.37% for NBTR.
NBFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.69), 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 NBTR
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