LSGR vs NBGX
Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Which is better, LSGR or NBGX?
NBGX has been ahead.
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 76.0%.
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 | LSGR | NBGX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.44%Best |
| AUM | $929M | $15M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.38% |
| Holdings | 44 | 112 |
| YTD Return | +2.25% | +8.10%Best |
| 1Y Return | +3.06% | +9.56%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.65% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.7% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.9% | -21.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $11,601 | $12,451Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 76.0% | 53.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Natixis Funds | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 29, 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).
LSGR 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.
LSGR vs NBGX Performance
Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR) is an ETF from Natixis Funds and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year LSGR returned +3.06% while NBGX returned +9.56%. Year to date, LSGR is up 2.25% versus a gain of 8.10% for NBGX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LSGR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% 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 -22.9% for LSGR 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LSGR charges 0.59% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $44 annually, a gap of $15 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LSGR currently yields 0.00% against 0.38% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
74.9% of LSGR's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 41.3% of NBGX's money is in holdings LSGR also owns.
Most of LSGR is already inside NBGX. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
11 positions in common, counted across the 21 positions we hold weights for in LSGR and 58 in NBGX, against full books of 44 and 112.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 42 positions for NBGX that do not appear in our book for LSGR (48.5% of the fund), and 10 for LSGR that do not appear in NBGX (24.7%).
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 LSGR | Weight in NBGX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 18.76% | 10.67% | 8.09% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 11.66% | 8.85% | 2.81% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 9.04% | 6.07% | 2.97% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 7.62% | 3.91% | 3.71% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.07% | 5.36% | 0.71% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 6.14% | 1.46% | 4.68% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 3.99% | 2.38% | 1.61% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 3.38% | 1.46% | 1.92% |
| BABoeing Co | 3.22% | 0.26% | 2.96% |
| CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity | 2.85% | 0.44% | 2.41% |
74.9% of LSGR 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, LSGR or NBGX?
LSGR has an expense ratio of 0.59% while NBGX charges 0.44%. NBGX is the cheaper option, by $15 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LSGR or NBGX?
Over the past year LSGR returned +3.06% vs +9.56% for NBGX, so NBGX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), LSGR annualized +8.60% vs +12.95% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LSGR or NBGX?
LSGR has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: LSGR -22.9% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both LSGR and NBGX?
LSGR and NBGX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 LSGR and NBGX?
74.9% of LSGR's money is in holdings NBGX also owns. 41.3% of NBGX's is in holdings LSGR also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 21 positions we hold weights for in LSGR and 58 in NBGX.
Which pays a higher dividend, LSGR or NBGX?
LSGR yields 0.00% while NBGX yields 0.38%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBGX better than LSGR?
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 76.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.