NBGX vs XOVR
Neuberger Berman Growth ETF vs ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF
Which is better, NBGX or XOVR?
NBGX has been ahead.
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | XOVR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.44%Best | 1.81% |
| AUM | $15M | $1.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.38% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 112 | 33 |
| YTD Return | +8.10%Best | +6.41% |
| 1Y Return | +9.56%Best | +1.58% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.10% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +5.66% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8%Best | 23.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -21.6%Best | -25.2% |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,451Best | $11,678 |
| Fund Family | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust | ERShares |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 18, 2024 | Nov 7, 2017 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
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 XOVR 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 XOVR Performance
Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust and ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF (XOVR) is an ETF from ERShares. Over the past year NBGX returned +9.56% while XOVR returned +1.58%. Year to date, NBGX is up 8.10% versus a gain of 6.41% for XOVR.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XOVR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.5% 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 -25.2% for XOVR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NBGX charges 0.44% per year while XOVR charges 1.81%. On a $10,000 position that is $44 vs $181 annually, a gap of $137 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NBGX currently yields 0.38% against 0.00% for XOVR.
Holdings Overlap
At least 28.8% of NBGX's money is in holdings XOVR also owns.
Stated as a floor: for XOVR, our book for it covers 77.3% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
NBGX and XOVR share little of their money.
5 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in NBGX and 30 in XOVR, against full books of 112 and 33.
28.8% of NBGX is already inside XOVR.
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 XOVR?
NBGX has an expense ratio of 0.44% while XOVR charges 1.81%. NBGX is the cheaper option, by $137 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, NBGX or XOVR?
Over the past year NBGX returned +9.56% vs +1.58% for XOVR, so NBGX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), NBGX annualized +12.95% vs +9.00% for XOVR. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NBGX or XOVR?
XOVR has been the more volatile fund at 23.5% annualized versus 15.8% for NBGX. Worst drawdown: NBGX -21.6% vs XOVR -25.2%.
Should I hold both NBGX and XOVR?
NBGX and XOVR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, 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 NBGX and XOVR?
At least 28.8% of NBGX's money is in holdings XOVR also owns. Our book for XOVR is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 5 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in NBGX and 30 in XOVR.
Which pays a higher dividend, NBGX or XOVR?
NBGX yields 0.38% while XOVR yields 0.00%, so NBGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XOVR better than NBGX?
NBGX has a lower expense ratio. NBGX led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.