NMANX vs. CTIGX

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

NMANX (Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund) and CTIGX (Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, NMANX returned 3.66%/yr vs 9.82%/yr for CTIGX. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NMANX charges 0.83%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for CTIGX.

Performance

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) and Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund (CTIGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMANX achieves a 3.41% return, which is significantly lower than CTIGX's 18.60% return.

NMANX

• 1D: -1.49%
• 1M: -4.95%
• 6M: -2.26%
• YTD: 3.41%
• 1Y: -1.37%
• 3Y*: 11.15%
• 5Y*: 3.66%
• 10Y*: 11.55%

CTIGX

• 1D: -2.73%
• 1M: -5.53%
• 6M: 14.97%
• YTD: 18.60%
• 1Y: 41.49%
• 3Y*: 26.50%
• 5Y*: 9.82%
• 10Y*: —

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

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	3.41%	5.51%	24.39%	18.21%	-28.82%	12.42%	39.45%	1.21%
CTIGX Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund	18.60%	21.21%	44.09%	12.26%	-34.88%	7.64%	58.94%	-3.80%

Correlation

The correlation between NMANX and CTIGX is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2019	0.93

The correlation between NMANX and CTIGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NMANX vs. CTIGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMANX

NMANX Risk / Return Rank: 3
NMANX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
NMANX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
NMANX Omega Ratio Rank: 3
NMANX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
NMANX Martin Ratio Rank: 3

CTIGX

CTIGX Risk / Return Rank: 59
CTIGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
CTIGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
CTIGX Omega Ratio Rank: 38
CTIGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CTIGX Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) and Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund (CTIGX). 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.

	NMANX	CTIGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.02	1.52	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.12	2.06	-1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.26	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.03	3.73	-3.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.08	13.12	-13.19

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMANX Sharpe Ratio is -0.02, which is lower than the CTIGX Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMANX and CTIGX, 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

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMANX drawdown since its inception was -72.14%, which is greater than CTIGX's maximum drawdown of -46.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMANX and CTIGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMANX	CTIGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.14%	-46.26%	-25.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.71%	-11.56%	-6.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.93%	-29.30%	+3.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.10%	-46.26%	+8.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.62%	-10.13%	+2.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.37%	-18.34%	+0.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.18%	3.28%	+2.90%

Volatility

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) is 6.57%, while Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund (CTIGX) has a volatility of 9.23%. This indicates that NMANX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTIGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMANX	CTIGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.57%	9.23%	-2.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.45%	23.00%	-5.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.94%	28.44%	-6.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.50%	27.44%	-3.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.55%	29.24%	-6.69%

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMANX has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is lower than CTIGX's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMANX vs. CTIGX - Dividend Comparison

NMANX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.33%, more than CTIGX's 3.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTIGX Calamos Timpani SMID Growth Fund	3.87%	4.59%	2.80%	0.00%	0.00%	11.76%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	22.33%	23.10%	9.85%	3.19%	4.87%	16.30%	9.58%	5.43%	11.70%	8.94%	5.00%	9.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMANX and CTIGX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, NMANX and CTIGX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NMANX or CTIGX?

CTIGX has higher volatility (9.23%) compared to NMANX (6.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMANX dropped -72.14% vs CTIGX's -46.26%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTIGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs -0.02), 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.