FELG vs NBGX
Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, FELG or NBGX?
Nearly the same fund. FELG costs less.
FELG has a lower expense ratio. FELG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 52.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.0%.
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 | FELG | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.44% |
| AUM | $5.7B | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.35% | 0.39% |
| Holdings | 135 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +10.09%Best | +9.97% |
| 1Y Return | +12.03%Best | +10.90% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.33% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.2% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.7% | -21.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,935Best | $12,670 |
| Top 10 Weight | 58.0% | 52.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 20, 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 13, 2026 (1.8 years).
FELG 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.
FELG vs NBGX Performance
Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year FELG returned +12.03% while NBGX returned +10.90%. Year to date, FELG is up 10.09% versus a gain of 9.97% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FELG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.2% compared with 15.8% for NBGX. 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 -23.7% for FELG 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 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FELG charges 0.18% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $44 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FELG currently yields 0.35% against 0.39% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
68.2% of FELG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 72.1% of NBGX's money is in holdings FELG also owns.
Most of NBGX is already inside FELG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
27 positions in common, counted across the 133 positions we hold weights for in FELG and 55 in NBGX, against full books of 135 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 23 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for FELG (15.2% of the fund), and 91 for FELG that do not appear in NBGX (29.7%).
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 FELG | Weight in NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.59% | 10.36% | 5.23% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 7.54% | 8.85% | 1.31% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 8.24% | 4.49% | 3.75% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.28% | 5.17% | 0.11% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.94% | 5.26% | 0.32% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.63% | 5.77% | 2.14% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.79% | 2.66% | 1.13% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 3.10% | 2.86% | 0.24% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.68% | 4.10% | 3.42% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 2.75% | 1.53% | 1.22% |
72.1% of NBGX is already inside FELG.
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, FELG or NBGX?
FELG has an expense ratio of 0.18% while NBGX charges 0.44%. FELG is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FELG or NBGX?
Over the past year FELG returned +12.03% vs +10.90% for NBGX, so FELG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FELG annualized +15.37% vs +14.05% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FELG or NBGX?
FELG has been the more volatile fund at 17.2% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: FELG -23.7% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both FELG and NBGX?
FELG and NBGX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, 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 FELG and NBGX?
72.1% of NBGX's money is in holdings FELG also owns. 72.1% of NBGX's is in holdings FELG also owns. They hold 27 positions in common, counted across the 133 positions we hold weights for in FELG and 55 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, FELG or NBGX?
FELG yields 0.35% while NBGX yields 0.39%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than FELG?
FELG has a lower expense ratio. FELG led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 52.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.