NBSM vs. NBET

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NBSM (Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF) and NBET (Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NBSM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman, while NBET is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBSM returned 8.81% vs 27.14% for NBET. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

NBSM vs. NBET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) and Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBSM achieves a 5.59% return, which is significantly lower than NBET's 24.24% return.

NBSM

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

NBET

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: -2.79%
• YTD: 24.24%
• 6M: 21.82%
• 1Y: 27.14%
• 3Y*: 20.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NBSM vs. NBET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBSM Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF	5.59%	-0.04%	-0.40%
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	24.24%	5.87%	23.62%

Correlation

The correlation between NBSM and NBET is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.47

Over the past year, the correlation between NBSM and NBET has dropped to 0.17 - well below their long-term average of 0.47, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

NBSM vs. NBET - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NBSM	NBET
Industrials	32.3%	2.6%
Technology	17.8%	-
Financial Services	16.4%	-
Healthcare	8.4%	-
Energy	7.2%	89.0%
Utilities	6.1%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.0%	-
Communication Services	2.7%	-
Real Estate	2.7%	-
Basic Materials	1.5%	0.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	-

Return for Risk

NBSM vs. NBET — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBSM

NBSM Risk / Return Rank: 20
NBSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
NBSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
NBSM Omega Ratio Rank: 19
NBSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
NBSM Martin Ratio Rank: 22

NBET

NBET Risk / Return Rank: 59
NBET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
NBET Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
NBET Omega Ratio Rank: 49
NBET Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
NBET Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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. NBET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) and Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET). 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	NBET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	1.87	-1.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	2.49	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.31	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.87	3.99	-3.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.62	10.51	-7.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBSM vs. NBET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBSM Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the NBET Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBSM and NBET, 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

	NBSM	NBET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.59	1.87	-1.28
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	0.73	-0.60

Drawdowns

NBSM vs. NBET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBSM drawdown since its inception was -25.16%, which is greater than NBET's maximum drawdown of -18.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBSM and NBET.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBSM	NBET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.16%	-18.72%	-6.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.12%	-6.84%	-3.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.11%	-4.32%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.43%	-5.06%	-2.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.37%	2.59%	+0.78%

Volatility

NBSM vs. NBET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) is 3.92%, while Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF (NBET) has a volatility of 5.82%. This indicates that NBSM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NBET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBSM	NBET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.92%	5.82%	-1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.62%	11.12%	-0.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.98%	14.62%	+0.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.09%	19.54%	-1.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.09%	19.54%	-1.45%

NBSM vs. NBET - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NBSM and NBET have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

NBSM vs. NBET - Dividend Comparison

NBSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than NBET's 2.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
NBET Neuberger Berman Energy Transition & Infrastructure ETF	2.34%	2.70%	2.43%	1.22%	0.87%
NBSM Neuberger Small-Mid Cap ETF	0.38%	0.40%	0.23%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBSM and NBET in my portfolio?

NBSM and NBET have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBSM or NBET?

NBET has higher volatility (5.82%) compared to NBSM (3.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBSM dropped -25.16% vs NBET's -18.72%.

Which ETF is better, NBSM or NBET?

On 1-year performance, NBET leads with 27.14% vs 8.81% for NBSM. Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. On volatility, NBSM has been the lower-risk option at 3.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBSM or NBET?

Over the 1-year period, NBET has performed better with a 27.14% return vs 8.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBSM or NBET?

NBSM and NBET have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBSM or NBET?

NBET has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.38% for NBSM.

What is the main difference between NBSM and NBET?

NBSM is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while NBET is Energy Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 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.