NBJP vs. FLJH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NBJP (Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both Japan Equities funds. NBJP is actively managed, while FLJH is passively managed. Over the past year, NBJP returned 35.11% vs 46.83% for FLJH. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBJP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJH.

Performance

NBJP vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF (NBJP) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBJP achieves a 18.88% return, which is significantly lower than FLJH's 20.31% return.

NBJP

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 7.23%
• YTD: 18.88%
• 6M: 21.26%
• 1Y: 35.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLJH

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 8.59%
• YTD: 20.31%
• 6M: 18.71%
• 1Y: 46.83%
• 3Y*: 27.99%
• 5Y*: 20.80%
• 10Y*: —

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

NBJP vs. FLJH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBJP Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF	18.88%	30.41%	-3.34%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	20.31%	25.26%	9.35%

Correlation

The correlation between NBJP and FLJH is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2024	0.74

The correlation between NBJP and FLJH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBJP vs. FLJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBJP

NBJP Risk / Return Rank: 52
NBJP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
NBJP Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
NBJP Omega Ratio Rank: 53
NBJP Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
NBJP Martin Ratio Rank: 52

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 80
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 79
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

NBJP vs. FLJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF (NBJP) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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.

	NBJP	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.62	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	3.61	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.48	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.46	4.36	-1.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.84	17.09	-8.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBJP vs. FLJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBJP Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the FLJH Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBJP and FLJH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NBJP	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	2.62	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.13	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	0.75	+0.62

Drawdowns

NBJP vs. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBJP drawdown since its inception was -14.34%, smaller than the maximum FLJH drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBJP and FLJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBJP	FLJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.34%	-31.51%	+17.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.34%	-10.80%	-3.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.39%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.79%	0.00%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.22%	-5.32%	+2.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.98%	2.75%	+1.23%

Volatility

NBJP vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF (NBJP) has a higher volatility of 5.49% compared to Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) at 3.45%. This indicates that NBJP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBJP	FLJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.49%	3.45%	+2.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.51%	13.38%	+3.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.76%	17.98%	+1.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.55%	18.51%	+1.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.55%	19.82%	-0.27%

NBJP vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBJP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJH's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBJP vs. FLJH - Dividend Comparison

NBJP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than FLJH's 3.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	3.24%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%
NBJP Neuberger Berman Japan Equity ETF	1.92%	2.29%	0.75%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBJP and FLJH in my portfolio?

NBJP and FLJH have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBJP or FLJH?

NBJP has higher volatility (5.49%) compared to FLJH (3.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBJP dropped -14.34% vs FLJH's -31.51%.

Which ETF is better, NBJP or FLJH?

On 1-year performance, FLJH leads with 46.83% vs 35.11% for NBJP. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FLJH has been the lower-risk option at 3.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBJP or FLJH?

Over the 1-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 46.83% return vs 35.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBJP or FLJH?

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for NBJP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBJP or FLJH?

FLJH has the higher dividend yield at 3.24%, compared with 1.92% for NBJP.

What is the main difference between NBJP and FLJH?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for NBJP and 0.09% for FLJH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.79), 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.