NBGX vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NBGX (Neuberger Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBGX charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

NBGX vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

NBGX

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: 3.51%
• YTD: 6.18%
• 6M: 5.66%
• 1Y: 19.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NBGX vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
NBGX Neuberger Growth ETF	-0.38%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between NBGX and GRW is 0.60, 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 29, 2026	0.60

Return for Risk

NBGX vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

NBGX

NBGX Risk / Return Rank: 34
NBGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
NBGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
NBGX Omega Ratio Rank: 37
NBGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
NBGX Martin Ratio Rank: 31

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

NBGX vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Growth ETF (NBGX) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

	NBGX	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.92	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.29	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.44	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NBGX	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	13.58	-12.81

Drawdowns

NBGX vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBGX drawdown since its inception was -21.55%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBGX and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBGX	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.55%	-0.45%	-21.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.86%	-0.27%	-0.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.92%	-0.17%	-3.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.31%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NBGX	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.12%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.73%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.15%	8.89%	+5.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.96%	8.89%	+11.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.96%	8.89%	+11.07%

NBGX vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBGX has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBGX vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

NBGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%
NBGX Neuberger Growth ETF	0.39%	0.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBGX and GRW in my portfolio?

NBGX and GRW have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NBGX or GRW?

On fees, NBGX is cheaper at 0.44% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBGX or GRW?

NBGX is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

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

NBGX has the higher dividend yield at 0.39%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between NBGX and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for NBGX and 0.75% for GRW.