NBFC vs. TMB
NBFC (Flexible Credit Income ETF) and TMB (Thornburg Multi Sector Bond ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBFC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for TMB.
Performance
NBFC vs. TMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NBFC
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- -0.02%
- 6M
- 1.21%
- YTD
- 1.61%
- 1Y
- 6.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMB
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.01%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBFC vs. TMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 0.55% |
TMB Thornburg Multi Sector Bond ETF | 0.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBFC and TMB is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026 | 0.54 |
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. TMB — Risk / Return Rank
NBFC
TMB
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NBFC vs. TMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Flexible Credit Income ETF (NBFC) and Thornburg Multi Sector Bond ETF (TMB). 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 | TMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.38 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.08 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NBFC vs. TMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBFC drawdown since its inception was -3.99%, which is greater than TMB's maximum drawdown of -0.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFC and TMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBFC | TMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -0.60% | -3.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.44% | -0.52% | +0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.43% | -0.23% | -0.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.65% | — | — |
Volatility
NBFC vs. TMB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBFC | TMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.74% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.52% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.21% | 3.41% | -0.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.58% | 3.41% | +0.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.58% | 3.41% | +0.17% |
NBFC vs. TMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBFC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than TMB's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBFC vs. TMB - Dividend Comparison
NBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.29%, more than TMB's 0.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
NBFC Flexible Credit Income ETF | 7.29% | 7.71% | 3.95% |
TMB Thornburg Multi Sector Bond ETF | 0.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBFC and TMB have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NBFC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NBFC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for TMB.
NBFC has the higher dividend yield at 7.29%, compared with 0.71% for TMB.
They also come from different issuers: Neuberger and Thornburg. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for NBFC and 0.55% for TMB.
Find the right allocation for NBFC and TMB
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