IVV vs NBXG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Neuberger Berman Next Generation Connectivity Fund Inc
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | NBXG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.30% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | - | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 8.34% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 137 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +9.78% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +13.99% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | +24.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | +4.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 22.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -51.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Neuberger Berman | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 25, 2021 |
IVV vs NBXG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Neuberger Berman Next Generation Connectivity Fund Inc (NBXG) is a ETF from Neuberger Berman. Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while NBXG returned +13.99%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 9.78% for NBXG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.08% per year against +24.94% for NBXG; over five years the annualized figures are +12.96% and +4.39% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.00% annualized vs +4.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NBXG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.6% compared with 15.1% for IVV. 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 -56.5% for IVV and -51.8% for NBXG. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while NBXG charges 1.30%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $130 annually, a gap of $127 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 8.34% for NBXG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and NBXG share 26 holdings out of 531 unique holdings combined, representing a 23.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or NBXG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NBXG charges 1.30%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $127 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or NBXG?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +13.99% for NBXG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +4.35% for NBXG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or NBXG?
NBXG has been the more volatile fund at 22.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs NBXG -51.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and NBXG?
IVV and NBXG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and NBXG?
IVV and NBXG share 26 common holdings with a 23.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 531 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NBXG?
IVV yields 1.10% while NBXG yields 8.34%, so NBXG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.