NEMD vs. EIPX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) and EIPX (FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman, while EIPX is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Their -0.02 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. NEMD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for EIPX.

Performance

NEMD vs. EIPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NEMD achieves a 3.47% return, which is significantly lower than EIPX's 24.74% return.

NEMD

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -1.04%
• 6M: 1.88%
• YTD: 3.47%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

EIPX

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 3.77%
• 6M: 14.96%
• YTD: 24.74%
• 1Y: 29.89%
• 3Y*: 19.41%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.15%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	$1.76M	$1.94M	$1.35M
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	$328.32K	$489.11K	$564.01K

NEMD vs. EIPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	3.47%	7.10%
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	24.74%	4.37%

Correlation

The correlation between NEMD and EIPX is -0.02, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

NEMD vs. EIPX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NEMD

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

EIPX

EIPX Risk / Return Rank: 93
EIPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
EIPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
EIPX Omega Ratio Rank: 91
EIPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EIPX Martin Ratio Rank: 92

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NEMD vs. EIPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). 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.

	NEMD	EIPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.51	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.59	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.43	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	5.56	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	15.59	—

Drawdowns

NEMD vs. EIPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NEMD drawdown since its inception was -4.43%, smaller than the maximum EIPX drawdown of -15.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEMD and EIPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NEMD	EIPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.43%	-15.43%	+11.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.17%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.43%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.35%	-0.94%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.59%	-2.28%	+1.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.85%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NEMD	EIPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.45%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.73%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.44%	11.44%	-5.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.44%	14.95%	-8.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.44%	14.95%	-8.51%

NEMD vs. EIPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NEMD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than EIPX's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

NEMD vs. EIPX - Dividend Comparison

NEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.81%, more than EIPX's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	2.69%	3.23%	3.27%	3.48%	0.34%
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	5.81%	2.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NEMD and EIPX in my portfolio?

NEMD and EIPX have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NEMD or EIPX?

On fees, NEMD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NEMD or EIPX?

NEMD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EIPX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NEMD or EIPX?

NEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.81%, compared with 2.69% for EIPX.

What is the main difference between NEMD and EIPX?

NEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while EIPX is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for NEMD and 0.95% for EIPX.