NBTR vs. MAMB

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NBTR (Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF) and MAMB (Monarch Ambassador Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. NBTR is actively managed, while MAMB is passively managed. Over the past year, NBTR returned 5.50% vs 8.73% for MAMB. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NBTR charges 0.37%/yr vs 1.49%/yr for MAMB.

Performance

NBTR vs. MAMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) and Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBTR achieves a 0.54% return, which is significantly lower than MAMB's 2.10% return.

NBTR

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 0.54%
• 6M: 0.85%
• 1Y: 5.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MAMB

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: 2.10%
• 6M: 2.20%
• 1Y: 8.73%
• 3Y*: 5.40%
• 5Y*: 0.74%
• 10Y*: —

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

NBTR vs. MAMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF	0.54%	8.07%	-0.26%
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF	2.10%	10.69%	-0.22%

Correlation

The correlation between NBTR and MAMB is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.84

The correlation between NBTR and MAMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBTR vs. MAMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBTR

NBTR Risk / Return Rank: 45
NBTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
NBTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
NBTR Omega Ratio Rank: 45
NBTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
NBTR Martin Ratio Rank: 43

MAMB

MAMB Risk / Return Rank: 46
MAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
MAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
MAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 44
MAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
MAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

NBTR vs. MAMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) and Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB). 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.

	NBTR	MAMB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	1.56	+0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.32	2.18	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.28	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.17	2.47	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.80	6.97	-0.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBTR vs. MAMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the MAMB Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBTR and MAMB, 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

	NBTR	MAMB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	1.56	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.40	0.16	+1.24

Drawdowns

NBTR vs. MAMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBTR drawdown since its inception was -2.58%, smaller than the maximum MAMB drawdown of -19.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBTR and MAMB.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBTR	MAMB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.58%	-19.33%	+16.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.54%	-3.55%	+1.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-1.57%	+0.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.59%	-7.50%	+6.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.81%	1.26%	-0.45%

Volatility

NBTR vs. MAMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) is 1.18%, while Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB) has a volatility of 1.70%. This indicates that NBTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MAMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBTR	MAMB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.18%	1.70%	-0.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.60%	4.21%	-1.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.55%	5.67%	-2.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.09%	6.99%	-2.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.09%	6.91%	-2.82%

NBTR vs. MAMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBTR has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is lower than MAMB's 1.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBTR vs. MAMB - Dividend Comparison

NBTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.58%, more than MAMB's 2.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF	2.44%	2.47%	2.11%	1.73%	0.92%	0.56%
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF	5.58%	5.76%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBTR and MAMB in my portfolio?

NBTR and MAMB have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBTR or MAMB?

MAMB has higher volatility (1.70%) compared to NBTR (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBTR dropped -2.58% vs MAMB's -19.33%.

Which ETF is better, NBTR or MAMB?

On 1-year performance, MAMB leads with 8.73% vs 5.50% for NBTR. On fees, NBTR is cheaper at 0.37% per year. On volatility, NBTR has been the lower-risk option at 1.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBTR or MAMB?

Over the 1-year period, MAMB has performed better with a 8.73% return vs 5.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBTR or MAMB?

NBTR is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for MAMB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NBTR or MAMB?

NBTR has the higher dividend yield at 5.58%, compared with 2.44% for MAMB.

What is the main difference between NBTR and MAMB?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger and Monarch. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for NBTR and 1.49% for MAMB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NBTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.56), 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.