NBOS vs. JULJ
NBOS (Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF) and JULJ (Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBOS returned 19.19% vs 5.56% for JULJ. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBOS charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for JULJ.
Performance
NBOS vs. JULJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NBOS achieves a 6.51% return, which is significantly higher than JULJ's 1.82% return.
NBOS
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- YTD
- 6.51%
- 6M
- 7.94%
- 1Y
- 19.19%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JULJ
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.82%
- 6M
- 2.32%
- 1Y
- 5.56%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBOS vs. JULJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF | 6.51% | 12.22% | 10.99% |
JULJ Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July | 1.82% | 5.91% | 5.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBOS and JULJ 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024 | 0.65 |
The correlation between NBOS and JULJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.65 - 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
NBOS vs. JULJ — Risk / Return Rank
NBOS
JULJ
NBOS vs. JULJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ). 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.
| NBOS | JULJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.88 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.09 | 9.21 | -5.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.25 | 47.78 | -24.53 |
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
| NBOS | JULJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.58 | 3.62 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.29 | 1.96 | -0.67 |
Drawdowns
NBOS vs. JULJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBOS drawdown since its inception was -12.66%, which is greater than JULJ's maximum drawdown of -3.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBOS and JULJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBOS | JULJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.66% | -3.62% | -9.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.71% | -0.61% | -4.10% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -0.02% | -0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.10% | -0.10% | -1.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.83% | 0.12% | +0.71% |
Volatility
NBOS vs. JULJ - Volatility Comparison
Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) has a higher volatility of 0.84% compared to Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ) at 0.17%. This indicates that NBOS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JULJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBOS | JULJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.84% | 0.17% | +0.67% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.90% | 0.94% | +4.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.47% | 1.54% | +5.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.96% | 3.08% | +6.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.96% | 3.08% | +6.88% |
NBOS vs. JULJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBOS has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than JULJ's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBOS vs. JULJ - Dividend Comparison
NBOS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.93%, more than JULJ's 5.66% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
JULJ Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July | 5.66% | 5.76% | 5.96% | 3.21% |
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF | 7.93% | 7.81% | 7.32% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBOS and JULJ 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.
NBOS has higher volatility (0.84%) compared to JULJ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBOS dropped -12.66% vs JULJ's -3.62%.
On 1-year performance, NBOS leads with 19.19% vs 5.56% for JULJ. On fees, NBOS is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, JULJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, NBOS has performed better with a 19.19% return vs 5.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NBOS is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULJ.
NBOS has the higher dividend yield at 7.93%, compared with 5.66% for JULJ.
They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NBOS and 0.79% for JULJ.
JULJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.62 vs 2.58), 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 NBOS and JULJ
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