PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NBGX vs. NBTR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NBGX vs. NBTR - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBGX achieves a 2.29% return, which is significantly higher than NBTR's 0.66% return.


NBGX

1D
-1.58%
1M
-2.72%
YTD
2.29%
6M
1.76%
1Y
14.95%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NBTR

1D
0.04%
1M
0.69%
YTD
0.66%
6M
0.77%
1Y
5.18%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NBGX vs. NBTR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
NBGX
Neuberger Growth ETF
2.29%16.40%-1.22%
NBTR
Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF
0.66%8.07%-0.26%

Correlation

The correlation between NBGX and NBTR is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024

0.28

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

NBGX vs. NBTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBGX
NBGX Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
NBGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NBGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
NBGX Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
NBGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
NBGX Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

NBTR
NBTR Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
NBTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NBTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
NBTR Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
NBTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
NBTR Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank
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. NBTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

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.


NBGXNBTRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.27

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.01

2.05

-1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.42

6.14

-2.72

NBGX vs. NBTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the NBTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBGX and NBTR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NBGX vs. NBTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBGX drawdown since its inception was -21.55%, which is greater than NBTR's maximum drawdown of -2.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBGX and NBTR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NBGXNBTRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.55%

-2.58%

-18.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.86%

-2.54%

-12.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.50%

-0.98%

-3.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.89%

-0.64%

-3.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.38%

0.84%

+3.54%

Volatility

NBGX vs. NBTR - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Growth ETF (NBGX) has a higher volatility of 5.34% compared to Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) at 0.84%. This indicates that NBGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NBTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NBGXNBTRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.34%

0.84%

+4.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.58%

2.63%

+8.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.84%

3.50%

+11.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.06%

4.10%

+15.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.06%

4.10%

+15.96%

NBGX vs. NBTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBGX has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is higher than NBTR's 0.37% expense ratio.


Dividends

NBGX vs. NBTR - Dividend Comparison

NBGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, less than NBTR's 5.57% yield.


PositionTTM2025
NBGX
Neuberger Growth ETF
0.40%0.41%
NBTR
Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF
5.57%5.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


NBGX and NBTR have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NBGX has higher volatility (5.34%) compared to NBTR (0.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBGX dropped -21.55% vs NBTR's -2.58%.

On 1-year performance, NBGX leads with 14.95% vs 5.18% for NBTR. On fees, NBTR is cheaper at 0.37% per year. On volatility, NBTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, NBGX has performed better with a 14.95% return vs 5.18%. 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 0.44% for NBGX.

NBTR has the higher dividend yield at 5.57%, compared with 0.40% for NBGX.

NBGX is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while NBTR is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for NBGX and 0.37% for NBTR.

NBTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 1.01), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NBGX 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