NBSM vs. FEMG
NBSM (Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF) and FEMG (Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBSM charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for FEMG.
Performance
NBSM vs. FEMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NBSM
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 5.59%
- 6M
- 3.81%
- 1Y
- 8.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FEMG
- 1D
- -0.84%
- 1M
- 3.74%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NBSM vs. FEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NBSM Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF | -1.21% |
FEMG Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF | 4.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBSM and FEMG is 0.59, 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 1, 2026 | 0.59 |
NBSM vs. FEMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NBSM
FEMG
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
NBSM
FEMG
Technology
NBSM
FEMG
Financial Services
NBSM
FEMG
Healthcare
NBSM
FEMG
Energy
NBSM
FEMG
Utilities
NBSM
FEMG
Consumer Cyclical
NBSM
FEMG
Communication Services
NBSM
FEMG
Real Estate
NBSM
FEMG
Basic Materials
NBSM
FEMG
Consumer Defensive
NBSM
-
FEMG
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
NBSM vs. FEMG — Risk / Return Rank
NBSM
FEMG
NBSM vs. FEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) and Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF (FEMG). 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.
| NBSM | FEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.87 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.62 | — | — |
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
| NBSM | FEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.13 | 4.78 | -4.66 |
Drawdowns
NBSM vs. FEMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBSM drawdown since its inception was -25.16%, which is greater than FEMG's maximum drawdown of -3.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBSM and FEMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBSM | FEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.16% | -3.29% | -21.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.11% | -1.18% | -3.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.43% | -0.96% | -6.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.37% | — | — |
Volatility
NBSM vs. FEMG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBSM | FEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.92% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.62% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.98% | 12.29% | +2.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 12.29% | +5.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 12.29% | +5.80% |
NBSM vs. FEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBSM has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FEMG's 0.23% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBSM vs. FEMG - Dividend Comparison
NBSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, while FEMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
FEMG Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NBSM Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF | 0.38% | 0.40% | 0.23% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBSM and FEMG have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FEMG is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FEMG is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NBSM.
NBSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for FEMG.
They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for NBSM and 0.23% for FEMG.
Find the right allocation for NBSM and FEMG
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