NEMD vs. ENFR
NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. NEMD is actively managed, while ENFR is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. NEMD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.
Performance
NEMD vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NEMD achieves a 3.89% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 28.57% return.
NEMD
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- -0.53%
- 6M
- 3.30%
- YTD
- 3.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ENFR
- 1D
- 1.98%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 29.84%
- YTD
- 28.57%
- 1Y
- 31.23%
- 3Y*
- 28.06%
- 5Y*
- 21.61%
- 10Y*
- 11.74%
NEMD vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 3.89% | 7.10% |
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 28.57% | 1.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between NEMD and ENFR is -0.19, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
NEMD vs. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank
NEMD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ENFR
NEMD vs. ENFR - 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 Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). 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 | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.35 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.63 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 8.93 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NEMD vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NEMD drawdown since its inception was -4.43%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEMD and ENFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NEMD | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.43% | -68.28% | +63.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.95% | -1.93% | +0.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.56% | -15.89% | +15.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.51% | — |
Volatility
NEMD vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NEMD | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.68% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 12.06% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.55% | 15.20% | -8.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 19.28% | -12.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 24.65% | -18.10% |
NEMD vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
NEMD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
NEMD vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison
NEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.25%, more than ENFR's 3.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 3.90% | 4.77% | 4.41% | 5.48% | 5.23% | 7.86% | 7.57% | 5.81% | 3.98% | 2.98% | 3.31% | 3.34% |
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 5.25% | 2.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NEMD and ENFR have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for NEMD.
NEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.25%, compared with 3.90% for ENFR.
NEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while ENFR is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for NEMD and 0.35% for ENFR.
Find the right allocation for NEMD and ENFR
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