PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NBSM vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NBSM vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBSM achieves a 5.59% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.37% return.


NBSM

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.41%
YTD
5.59%
6M
3.81%
1Y
8.81%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
0.02%
1M
0.27%
YTD
2.37%
6M
2.51%
1Y
4.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NBSM vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
NBSM
Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF
5.59%-0.04%-0.40%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.37%4.96%4.34%

Correlation

The correlation between NBSM and IBIC is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.14

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024

-0.07

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. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBSM
NBSM Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
NBSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NBSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
NBSM Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
NBSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
NBSM Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

NBSM vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.


NBSMIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-8.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

2.24

-1.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.87

17.27

-16.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.62

67.45

-64.83

NBSM vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBSM Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 5.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBSM and IBIC, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NBSMIBICDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.59

5.05

-4.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

3.49

-3.36

Drawdowns

NBSM vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBSM drawdown since its inception was -25.16%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBSM and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NBSMIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.16%

-0.90%

-24.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.12%

-0.26%

-9.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.11%

-0.13%

-4.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.43%

-0.10%

-7.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.37%

0.07%

+3.30%

Volatility

NBSM vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) has a higher volatility of 3.92% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.33%. This indicates that NBSM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NBSMIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.92%

0.33%

+3.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.62%

0.67%

+9.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.98%

0.90%

+14.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.09%

1.58%

+16.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.09%

1.58%

+16.51%

NBSM vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBSM has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

NBSM vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

NBSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%
NBSM
Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF
0.38%0.40%0.23%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NBSM and IBIC have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NBSM has higher volatility (3.92%) compared to IBIC (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBSM dropped -25.16% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, NBSM leads with 8.81% vs 4.54% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, NBSM has performed better with a 8.81% return vs 4.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for NBSM.

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.38% for NBSM.

NBSM is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for NBSM and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.05 vs 0.59), 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 NBSM and IBIC

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