FLCG vs NBGX
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, FLCG or NBGX?
Nearly the same fund. FLCG costs less.
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. FLCG led over 1Y, NBGX over the full window. 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 56.5%.
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 | FLCG | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39%Best | 0.44% |
| AUM | $687M | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.04% | 0.38% |
| Holdings | 208 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +7.29% | +8.10%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.89%Best | +9.56% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.3% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.9% | -21.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,383 | $12,451Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 56.5% | 53.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Federated Hermes | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 30, 2024 | Dec 18, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 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).
FLCG 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.
FLCG vs NBGX Performance
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) is an ETF from Federated Hermes and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year FLCG returned +9.89% while NBGX returned +9.56%. Year to date, FLCG is up 7.29% versus a gain of 8.10% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FLCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.3% 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 -22.9% for FLCG 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
FLCG charges 0.39% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $44 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLCG currently yields 0.04% against 0.38% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
67.5% of FLCG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 67.2% of NBGX's money is in holdings FLCG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
23 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FLCG and 58 in NBGX, against full books of 208 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 31 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for FLCG (24.1% of the fund), and 73 for FLCG that do not appear in NBGX (31.9%).
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 FLCG | Weight in NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.20% | 10.67% | 4.53% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 11.70% | 8.85% | 2.85% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.97% | 4.43% | 3.54% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.54% | 5.36% | 0.82% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.88% | 6.07% | 3.19% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.10% | 4.94% | 1.84% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.76% | 2.85% | 0.09% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.37% | 2.92% | 0.55% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.61% | 3.91% | 3.30% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 3.00% | 1.46% | 1.54% |
67.5% of FLCG 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, FLCG or NBGX?
FLCG has an expense ratio of 0.39% while NBGX charges 0.44%. FLCG is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLCG or NBGX?
Over the past year FLCG returned +9.89% vs +9.56% for NBGX, so FLCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FLCG annualized +12.61% vs +12.95% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLCG or NBGX?
FLCG has been the more volatile fund at 16.3% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: FLCG -22.9% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both FLCG and NBGX?
FLCG 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 FLCG and NBGX?
67.5% of FLCG's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 67.2% of NBGX's is in holdings FLCG also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FLCG and 58 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLCG or NBGX?
FLCG yields 0.04% while NBGX yields 0.38%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than FLCG?
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. FLCG led over 1Y, NBGX over the full window. 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 56.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.