NBOS vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NBOS (Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NBOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBOS returned 19.19% vs 26.98% for QFLR. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBOS charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.

Performance

NBOS vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBOS achieves a 6.51% return, which is significantly lower than QFLR's 6.90% return.

NBOS

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 2.06%
• YTD: 6.51%
• 6M: 7.94%
• 1Y: 19.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QFLR

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 3.99%
• YTD: 6.90%
• 6M: 5.88%
• 1Y: 26.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NBOS vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF	6.51%	12.22%	10.99%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	6.90%	17.27%	16.51%

Correlation

The correlation between NBOS and QFLR is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024	0.71

The correlation between NBOS and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBOS vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBOS

NBOS Risk / Return Rank: 84
NBOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
NBOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
NBOS Omega Ratio Rank: 87
NBOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
NBOS Martin Ratio Rank: 92

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 74
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 74
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

NBOS vs. QFLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.58	2.41	+0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	3.26	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.44	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.09	3.56	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.25	15.19	+8.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBOS vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBOS Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBOS and QFLR, 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

	NBOS	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58	2.41	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.29	1.40	-0.10

Drawdowns

NBOS vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBOS drawdown since its inception was -12.66%, smaller than the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBOS and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBOS	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.66%	-13.97%	+1.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.71%	-7.61%	+2.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.17%	-0.48%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.10%	-2.50%	+1.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.83%	1.78%	-0.95%

Volatility

NBOS vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) is 0.84%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.53%. This indicates that NBOS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBOS	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.84%	2.53%	-1.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.90%	8.05%	-2.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.47%	11.28%	-3.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.96%	12.62%	-2.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.96%	12.62%	-2.66%

NBOS vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBOS has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBOS vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

NBOS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.93%, while QFLR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF	7.93%	7.81%	7.32%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBOS and QFLR in my portfolio?

NBOS and QFLR have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBOS or QFLR?

QFLR has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to NBOS (0.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBOS dropped -12.66% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, NBOS or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.98% vs 19.19% for NBOS. On fees, NBOS is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, NBOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBOS or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 26.98% return vs 19.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBOS or QFLR?

NBOS is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBOS or QFLR?

NBOS has the higher dividend yield at 7.93%, compared with 0.00% for QFLR.

What is the main difference between NBOS and QFLR?

NBOS is categorized as Options Trading, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NBOS and 0.89% for QFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.58 vs 2.41), 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.