NULC vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NULC (Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - NULC tracks the MSCI TIAA ESG USA Large Cap while BIBL tracks the Inspire 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NULC returned 11.41%/yr vs 10.11%/yr for BIBL. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NULC charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

NULC vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NULC achieves a 14.11% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 23.84% return.

NULC

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: 5.76%
• YTD: 14.11%
• 6M: 14.35%
• 1Y: 26.94%
• 3Y*: 21.23%
• 5Y*: 11.41%
• 10Y*: —

BIBL

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 5.68%
• YTD: 23.84%
• 6M: 22.77%
• 1Y: 40.34%
• 3Y*: 22.20%
• 5Y*: 10.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

NULC vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	14.11%	16.29%	18.71%	22.54%	-20.18%	25.69%	22.51%	16.89%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	23.84%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	27.44%	22.62%	15.69%

Correlation

The correlation between NULC and BIBL is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019	0.92

The correlation between NULC and BIBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (1 year) to 0.92 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NULC vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NULC	BIBL
Technology	36.2%	30.1%
Financial Services	13.4%	8.3%
Communication Services	10.9%	-
Healthcare	8.7%	4.3%
Industrials	8.4%	26.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	0.3%
Consumer Defensive	6.0%	0.5%
Energy	2.4%	6.9%
Real Estate	2.3%	14.7%
Utilities	2.0%	3.5%
Basic Materials	1.7%	4.2%

Return for Risk

NULC vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

NULC

NULC Risk / Return Rank: 64
NULC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
NULC Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
NULC Omega Ratio Rank: 61
NULC Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
NULC Martin Ratio Rank: 70

BIBL

BIBL Risk / Return Rank: 81
BIBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BIBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BIBL Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BIBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BIBL Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

NULC vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). 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.

	NULC	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.62	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.92	3.53	-0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.45	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.04	4.53	-1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.07	19.63	-6.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NULC vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NULC Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NULC and BIBL, 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

	NULC	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.62	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.52	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.80	0.63	+0.17

Drawdowns

NULC vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NULC drawdown since its inception was -34.86%, roughly equal to the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NULC and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	NULC	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.86%	-36.12%	+1.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.91%	-8.94%	+0.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.53%	-20.60%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.90%	-30.85%	+2.95%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.57%	0.00%	-0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.30%	-7.04%	+0.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	2.06%	+0.01%

Volatility

NULC vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) is 3.29%, while Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that NULC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BIBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NULC	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	4.62%	-1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.90%	12.63%	-2.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.80%	15.47%	-2.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.85%	19.59%	-2.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.68%	21.08%	-1.40%

NULC vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

NULC has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

NULC vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

NULC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.91%, more than BIBL's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	0.95%	1.01%	0.92%	1.02%	0.98%	17.87%	1.67%	1.30%	1.49%	0.31%
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	8.91%	10.17%	1.86%	1.32%	2.37%	6.14%	4.07%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NULC and BIBL in my portfolio?

NULC and BIBL have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NULC or BIBL?

BIBL has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to NULC (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NULC dropped -34.86% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, NULC or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, NULC leads with 11.41% vs 10.11% for BIBL. On fees, NULC is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, NULC has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NULC or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, NULC has performed better with a 11.41% return vs 10.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NULC or BIBL?

NULC is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BIBL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NULC or BIBL?

NULC has the higher dividend yield at 8.91%, compared with 0.95% for BIBL.

What is the main difference between NULC and BIBL?

NULC tracks MSCI TIAA ESG USA Large Cap, while BIBL tracks Inspire 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for NULC and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.12), 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.