NMANX vs. FBCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NMANX (Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund) and FBCG (Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF) are both funds - NMANX is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Neuberger Berman, while FBCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Over the past 5 years, NMANX returned 6.46%/yr vs 15.84%/yr for FBCG. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NMANX charges 0.83%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FBCG.

Performance

NMANX vs. FBCG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMANX achieves a 11.53% return, which is significantly lower than FBCG's 15.59% return.

NMANX

• 1D: 1.11%
• 1M: 7.21%
• YTD: 11.53%
• 6M: 8.26%
• 1Y: 11.45%
• 3Y*: 17.27%
• 5Y*: 6.46%
• 10Y*: 12.61%

FBCG

• 1D: -1.05%
• 1M: 7.84%
• YTD: 15.59%
• 6M: 15.51%
• 1Y: 39.38%
• 3Y*: 30.60%
• 5Y*: 15.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

NMANX vs. FBCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	11.53%	5.51%	24.39%	18.21%	-28.82%	12.42%	33.01%
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	15.59%	18.60%	39.05%	57.98%	-39.10%	21.34%	42.99%

Correlation

The correlation between NMANX and FBCG is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020	0.88

The correlation between NMANX and FBCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NMANX vs. FBCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMANX

NMANX Risk / Return Rank: 7
NMANX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
NMANX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
NMANX Omega Ratio Rank: 7
NMANX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
NMANX Martin Ratio Rank: 7

FBCG

FBCG Risk / Return Rank: 57
FBCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
FBCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FBCG Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FBCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
FBCG Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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. FBCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) and Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG). 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.

	NMANX	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.60	2.14	-1.54
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.96	2.84	-1.88
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.36	-0.25
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	2.61	-1.92
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.01	10.14	-8.13
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NMANX vs. FBCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMANX Sharpe Ratio is 0.60, which is lower than the FBCG Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMANX and FBCG, 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

	NMANX	FBCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.60	2.14	-1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.62	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.56	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.83	-0.31

Drawdowns

NMANX vs. FBCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMANX drawdown since its inception was -72.14%, which is greater than FBCG's maximum drawdown of -43.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMANX and FBCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMANX	FBCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.14%	-43.56%	-28.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.71%	-15.17%	-2.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.93%	-27.89%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.10%	-43.56%	+5.46%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.05%	+1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.41%	-11.49%	-5.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.05%	3.90%	+2.15%

Volatility

NMANX vs. FBCG - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) has a higher volatility of 5.21% compared to Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF (FBCG) at 4.79%. This indicates that NMANX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMANX	FBCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.21%	4.79%	+0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.07%	13.89%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.33%	18.55%	+1.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.20%	25.79%	-2.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.47%	25.72%	-3.25%

NMANX vs. FBCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMANX has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is higher than FBCG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMANX vs. FBCG - Dividend Comparison

NMANX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 20.71%, more than FBCG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBCG Fidelity Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.12%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	20.71%	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 FBCG in my portfolio?

NMANX and FBCG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NMANX or FBCG?

NMANX has higher volatility (5.21%) compared to FBCG (4.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMANX dropped -72.14% vs FBCG's -43.56%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 0.60), 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.