NMANX vs. NML

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

NMANX (Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund) and NML (Neuberger Berman MLP) are both mutual funds - NMANX is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Neuberger Berman, while NML is a MLPs fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman. Over the past 10 years, NMANX returned 12.81%/yr vs 10.56%/yr for NML. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NMANX charges 0.83%/yr vs 2.72%/yr for NML.

Performance

NMANX vs. NML - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMANX achieves a 9.00% return, which is significantly lower than NML's 21.00% return. Over the past 10 years, NMANX has outperformed NML with an annualized return of 12.81%, while NML has yielded a comparatively lower 10.56% annualized return.

NMANX

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 6M: 5.83%
• 1Y: 6.68%
• 3Y*: 15.83%
• 5Y*: 4.22%
• 10Y*: 12.81%

NML

• 1D: 1.54%
• 1M: -2.84%
• YTD: 21.00%
• 6M: 22.15%
• 1Y: 22.75%
• 3Y*: 25.98%
• 5Y*: 23.36%
• 10Y*: 10.56%

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

NMANX vs. NML - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	9.00%	5.51%	24.39%	18.21%	-28.82%	12.42%	39.45%	33.62%	-6.28%	29.01%
NML Neuberger Berman MLP	21.00%	4.36%	40.55%	14.61%	32.75%	61.76%	-45.84%	10.60%	-23.02%	7.07%

Correlation

The correlation between NMANX and NML is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2013	0.36

Over the past year, the correlation between NMANX and NML has dropped to 0.06 - well below their long-term average of 0.36, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

NMANX vs. NML — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMANX

NMANX Risk / Return Rank: 6
NMANX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
NMANX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
NMANX Omega Ratio Rank: 6
NMANX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
NMANX Martin Ratio Rank: 6

NML

NML Risk / Return Rank: 33
NML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
NML Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
NML Omega Ratio Rank: 27
NML Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
NML Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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. NML - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) and Neuberger Berman MLP (NML). 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	NML	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.28	1.32	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.53	1.82	-1.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.23	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	2.36	-2.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.98	6.26	-5.28

NMANX vs. NML - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMANX Sharpe Ratio is 0.28, which is lower than the NML Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMANX and NML, 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. NML - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMANX drawdown since its inception was -72.14%, smaller than the maximum NML drawdown of -90.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMANX and NML.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMANX	NML	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.14%	-90.48%	+18.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.71%	-9.67%	-8.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.93%	-16.92%	-9.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.10%	-21.40%	-16.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.10%	-84.84%	+46.74%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.26%	-5.87%	+3.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.39%	-36.94%	+19.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.08%	3.64%	+2.44%

Volatility

NMANX vs. NML - Volatility Comparison

Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund (NMANX) has a higher volatility of 7.97% compared to Neuberger Berman MLP (NML) at 6.12%. This indicates that NMANX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMANX	NML	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.97%	6.12%	+1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.18%	13.77%	+3.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.49%	17.30%	+4.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.40%	23.81%	-0.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.53%	35.07%	-12.54%

NMANX vs. NML - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMANX has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is lower than NML's 2.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMANX vs. NML - Dividend Comparison

NMANX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.19%, more than NML's 7.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NMANX Neuberger Berman Mid Cap Growth Fund	21.19%	23.10%	9.85%	3.19%	4.87%	16.30%	9.58%	5.43%	11.70%	8.94%	5.00%	9.00%
NML Neuberger Berman MLP	7.44%	8.24%	7.94%	10.19%	4.26%	3.54%	8.33%	9.76%	9.87%	7.04%	8.63%	15.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMANX and NML in my portfolio?

NMANX and NML have a correlation of 0.06, 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 NML?

NMANX has higher volatility (7.97%) compared to NML (6.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMANX dropped -72.14% vs NML's -90.48%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.28), 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.