FFOG vs NBGX
Franklin Focused Dynamic Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, FFOG or NBGX?
Nearly the same fund. FFOG costs less.
FFOG has a lower expense ratio. FFOG led over the full window, NBGX over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.5%.
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 | FFOG | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.41%Best | 0.44% |
| AUM | $386M | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.38% |
| Holdings | 43 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +8.34%Best | +8.10% |
| 1Y Return | +7.46% | +9.56%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.71% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.7% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.4% | -21.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,477Best | $12,451 |
| Top 10 Weight | 55.5% | 53.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 6, 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).
FFOG 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.
FFOG vs NBGX Performance
Franklin Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FFOG) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year FFOG returned +7.46% while NBGX returned +9.56%. Year to date, FFOG is up 8.34% versus a gain of 8.10% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFOG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.7% 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 -25.4% for FFOG 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 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFOG charges 0.41% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $41 vs $44 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFOG currently yields 0.00% against 0.38% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
69.6% of FFOG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 63.5% of NBGX's money is in holdings FFOG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 41 positions we hold weights for in FFOG and 58 in NBGX, against full books of 43 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 38 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for FFOG (33.4% of the fund), and 17 for FFOG that do not appear in NBGX (22.4%).
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 FFOG | Weight in NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.05% | 10.67% | 0.62% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 7.96% | 8.85% | 0.89% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 8.49% | 3.91% | 4.58% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.98% | 6.07% | 1.09% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.50% | 4.43% | 1.07% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.90% | 5.36% | 1.46% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.45% | 4.94% | 1.49% |
| 2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 4.29% | 2.90% | 1.39% |
| ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares | 2.34% | 3.30% | 0.96% |
| SNDKVSandisk Corp. | 3.92% | 1.69% | 2.23% |
69.6% of FFOG is already inside NBGX.
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, FFOG or NBGX?
FFOG has an expense ratio of 0.41% while NBGX charges 0.44%. FFOG is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFOG or NBGX?
Over the past year FFOG returned +7.46% vs +9.56% for NBGX, so NBGX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FFOG annualized +13.08% vs +12.95% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFOG or NBGX?
FFOG has been the more volatile fund at 22.7% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: FFOG -25.4% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both FFOG and NBGX?
FFOG and NBGX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, 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 FFOG and NBGX?
69.6% of FFOG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 63.5% of NBGX's is in holdings FFOG also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 41 positions we hold weights for in FFOG and 58 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFOG or NBGX?
FFOG yields 0.00% while NBGX yields 0.38%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than FFOG?
FFOG has a lower expense ratio. FFOG led over the full window, NBGX over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.