CAML vs NBGX
Congress Large Cap Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, CAML or NBGX?
Nearly the same fund. NBGX costs less.
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. CAML is less concentrated, with 45.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.4%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CAML | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.44%Best |
| AUM | $394M | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.38% |
| Holdings | 39 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +6.09% | +8.10%Best |
| 1Y Return | +5.81% | +9.56%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.98% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.5%Best | 15.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -21.1%Best | -21.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $11,879 | $12,451Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 45.7%Best | 53.4% |
| Fund Family | Congress Asset Management Company | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 22, 2023 | Dec 18, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 19, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
CAML vs NBGX growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.8 years both funds cover.
CAML vs NBGX Performance
Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) is an ETF from Congress Asset Management Company and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year CAML returned +5.81% while NBGX returned +9.56%. Year to date, CAML is up 6.09% versus a gain of 8.10% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NBGX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% compared with 14.5% for CAML. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -21.1% for CAML and -21.6% for NBGX. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CAML charges 0.65% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $44 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CAML currently yields 0.00% against 0.38% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
60.1% of CAML's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 62.3% of NBGX's money is in holdings CAML also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in CAML and 58 in NBGX, against full books of 39 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 36 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for CAML (28.5% of the fund), and 17 for CAML that do not appear in NBGX (33.7%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CAML | Weight in NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.44% | 10.67% | 2.23% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.48% | 8.85% | 3.37% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.03% | 5.36% | 0.67% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.20% | 4.43% | 1.77% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.10% | 6.07% | 2.97% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.22% | 4.94% | 0.72% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.82% | 3.91% | 1.09% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 3.27% | 2.17% | 1.10% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.41% | 2.85% | 0.44% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.57% | 2.38% | 0.19% |
62.3% of NBGX is already inside CAML.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CAML or NBGX?
CAML has an expense ratio of 0.65% while NBGX charges 0.44%. NBGX is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CAML or NBGX?
Over the past year CAML returned +5.81% vs +9.56% for NBGX, so NBGX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CAML annualized +10.04% vs +12.95% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CAML or NBGX?
NBGX has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 14.5% for CAML. Worst drawdown: CAML -21.1% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both CAML and NBGX?
CAML and NBGX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CAML and NBGX?
62.3% of NBGX's money is in holdings CAML also owns. 62.3% of NBGX's is in holdings CAML also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in CAML and 58 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, CAML or NBGX?
CAML yields 0.00% while NBGX yields 0.38%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than CAML?
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. CAML is less concentrated, with 45.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.