NBDS vs OMFL
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF vs Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Which is better, NBDS or OMFL?
Each has led over a different period.
OMFL has a lower expense ratio. NBDS led over 3Y and the full window, OMFL over 1Y. OMFL is less concentrated, with 37.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.6%.
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 | NBDS | OMFL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.29%Best |
| AUM | $183M | $4.8B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.33% | 0.84% |
| Holdings | 32 | 1,272 |
| YTD Return | +11.35% | +15.31%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.23% | +18.97%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.50%Best | +16.52% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.22% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 23.4% | 15.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -29.8% | -19.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.5 years | $16,400Best | $15,577 |
| Top 10 Weight | 46.6% | 37.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Neuberger Berman | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 6, 2022 | Nov 8, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 7, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.5 years).
NBDS vs OMFL 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 4.5 years both funds cover.
NBDS vs OMFL Performance
Neuberger Berman Disrupters ETF (NBDS) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman and Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFL) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year NBDS returned +9.23% while OMFL returned +18.97%. Year to date, NBDS is up 11.35% versus a gain of 15.31% for OMFL.
Over three years, NBDS compounded at +21.50% per year against +16.52% for OMFL.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NBDS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.4% compared with 15.8% for OMFL. 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 -29.8% for NBDS and -19.8% for OMFL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NBDS charges 0.40% per year while OMFL charges 0.29%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $29 annually, a gap of $11 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NBDS currently yields 0.33% against 0.84% for OMFL.
Holdings Overlap
57.9% of NBDS's money is in holdings OMFL also owns. 11.6% of OMFL's money is in holdings NBDS also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in NBDS and 577 in OMFL, against full books of 32 and 1,272.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 532 positions for OMFL that do not appear in our book for NBDS (87.3% of the fund), and 10 for NBDS that do not appear in OMFL (25.8%).
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 NBDS | Weight in OMFL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.46% | 5.56% | 1.90% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 5.41% | 0.70% | 4.71% |
| SNOWSnowflake Inc | 4.80% | 0.02% | 4.78% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.69% | 1.88% | 0.81% |
| CEGConstellation Energy Corporation Com | 4.05% | 0.09% | 3.96% |
| HOODRobinhood Markets Inc - A | 3.92% | 0.02% | 3.90% |
| MPWRMonolithic Power Systems Inc | 3.57% | 0.22% | 3.35% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.82% | 0.82% | 2.00% |
| ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc. | 2.62% | 0.70% | 1.92% |
| NOWServicenow, Inc. | 2.97% | 0.10% | 2.87% |
57.9% of NBDS is already inside OMFL.
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, NBDS or OMFL?
NBDS has an expense ratio of 0.40% while OMFL charges 0.29%. OMFL is the cheaper option, by $11 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, NBDS or OMFL?
Over the past year NBDS returned +9.23% vs +18.97% for OMFL, so OMFL leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NBDS or OMFL?
NBDS has been the more volatile fund at 23.4% annualized versus 15.8% for OMFL. Worst drawdown: NBDS -29.8% vs OMFL -19.8%.
Should I hold both NBDS and OMFL?
NBDS and OMFL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between NBDS and OMFL?
57.9% of NBDS's money is in holdings OMFL also owns. 11.6% of OMFL's is in holdings NBDS also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in NBDS and 577 in OMFL.
Which pays a higher dividend, NBDS or OMFL?
NBDS yields 0.33% while OMFL yields 0.84%, so OMFL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OMFL better than NBDS?
OMFL has a lower expense ratio. NBDS led over 3Y and the full window, OMFL over 1Y. OMFL is less concentrated, with 37.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.