NBTR vs. MBS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

NBTR (Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF) and MBS (Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBTR returned 5.42% vs 6.13% for MBS. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBTR charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for MBS.

Performance

NBTR vs. MBS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NBTR achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than MBS's 0.86% return.

NBTR

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 0.65%
• YTD: 0.62%
• 6M: 0.76%
• 1Y: 5.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MBS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.65%
• YTD: 0.86%
• 6M: 1.14%
• 1Y: 6.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NBTR vs. MBS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF	0.62%	8.07%	-0.93%
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	0.86%	8.13%	-0.26%

Correlation

The correlation between NBTR and MBS is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2024	0.64

The correlation between NBTR and MBS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBTR vs. MBS — 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: 44
NBTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
NBTR Martin Ratio Rank: 42

MBS

MBS Risk / Return Rank: 66
MBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
MBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
MBS Omega Ratio Rank: 74
MBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
MBS Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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. MBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) and Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	NBTR	MBS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	2.22	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	3.35	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.42	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.15	2.80	-0.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.45	8.16	-1.71

NBTR vs. MBS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the MBS Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBTR and MBS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NBTR vs. MBS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBTR drawdown since its inception was -2.58%, smaller than the maximum MBS drawdown of -4.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBTR and MBS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBTR	MBS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.58%	-4.09%	+1.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.54%	-2.20%	-0.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.02%	-1.23%	+0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.64%	-1.02%	+0.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	0.75%	+0.09%

Volatility

NBTR vs. MBS - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF (NBTR) has a higher volatility of 0.84% compared to Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (MBS) at 0.76%. This indicates that NBTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NBTR	MBS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.84%	0.76%	+0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.64%	2.04%	+0.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.50%	2.77%	+0.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.10%	3.97%	+0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.10%	3.97%	+0.13%

NBTR vs. MBS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBTR has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is lower than MBS's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBTR vs. MBS - Dividend Comparison

NBTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.57%, which matches MBS's 5.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
MBS Angel Oak Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF	5.60%	5.28%	4.52%
NBTR Neuberger Total Return Bond ETF	5.57%	5.76%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBTR and MBS in my portfolio?

NBTR and MBS have a correlation of 0.62, 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 MBS?

NBTR has higher volatility (0.84%) compared to MBS (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBTR dropped -2.58% vs MBS's -4.09%.

Which ETF is better, NBTR or MBS?

On 1-year performance, MBS leads with 6.13% vs 5.42% for NBTR. On fees, NBTR is cheaper at 0.37% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBTR or MBS?

Over the 1-year period, MBS has performed better with a 6.13% return vs 5.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBTR or MBS?

NBTR is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MBS.

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

MBS has the higher dividend yield at 5.60%, compared with 5.57% for NBTR.

What is the main difference between NBTR and MBS?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger and Angel Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for NBTR and 0.49% for MBS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MBS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 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.