NBGX vs TCHP
Neuberger Berman Growth ETF vs T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF
Which is better, NBGX or TCHP?
Nearly the same fund. NBGX costs less.
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.3%.
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 | NBGX | TCHP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.44%Best | 0.57% |
| AUM | $15M | $2.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.38% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 112 | 65 |
| YTD Return | +8.10%Best | +2.74% |
| 1Y Return | +9.56%Best | +5.10% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.18% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8%Best | 17.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -21.6%Best | -22.9% |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,451Best | $12,018 |
| Top 10 Weight | 53.4%Best | 59.3% |
| Fund Family | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust | T.Rowe Price |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 18, 2024 | Aug 4, 2020 |
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).
NBGX vs TCHP 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.
NBGX vs TCHP Performance
Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust and T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) is an ETF from T.Rowe Price. Over the past year NBGX returned +9.56% while TCHP returned +5.10%. Year to date, NBGX is up 8.10% versus a gain of 2.74% for TCHP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TCHP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.7% 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 -21.6% for NBGX and -22.9% for TCHP. 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
NBGX charges 0.44% per year while TCHP charges 0.57%. On a $10,000 position that is $44 vs $57 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NBGX currently yields 0.38% against 0.00% for TCHP.
Holdings Overlap
74.3% of NBGX's money is in holdings TCHP also owns. 72.8% of TCHP's money is in holdings NBGX also owns.
Most of NBGX is already inside TCHP. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
27 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in NBGX and 62 in TCHP, against full books of 112 and 65.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 34 positions for TCHP that do not appear in our book for NBGX (26.4% of the fund), and 29 for NBGX that do not appear in TCHP (22.7%).
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 NBGX | Weight in TCHP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.67% | 17.43% | 6.76% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 8.85% | 5.50% | 3.35% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.36% | 5.92% | 0.56% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.94% | 5.79% | 0.85% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 6.07% | 3.53% | 2.54% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.43% | 4.94% | 0.51% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.91% | 3.60% | 0.31% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.92% | 3.05% | 0.13% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.38% | 2.69% | 0.31% |
| ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares | 3.30% | 1.36% | 1.94% |
74.3% of NBGX is already inside TCHP.
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, NBGX or TCHP?
NBGX has an expense ratio of 0.44% while TCHP charges 0.57%. NBGX is the cheaper option, by $13 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, NBGX or TCHP?
Over the past year NBGX returned +9.56% vs +5.10% for TCHP, so NBGX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), NBGX annualized +12.95% vs +10.75% for TCHP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NBGX or TCHP?
TCHP has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: NBGX -21.6% vs TCHP -22.9%.
Should I hold both NBGX and TCHP?
NBGX and TCHP 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 NBGX and TCHP?
74.3% of NBGX's money is in holdings TCHP also owns. 72.8% of TCHP's is in holdings NBGX also owns. They hold 27 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in NBGX and 62 in TCHP.
Which pays a higher dividend, NBGX or TCHP?
NBGX yields 0.38% while TCHP yields 0.00%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TCHP better than NBGX?
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. NBGX is less concentrated, with 53.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.