APRP vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

APRP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - APRP is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. APRP is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, APRP returned 18.46% vs 89.50% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. APRP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

APRP vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, APRP achieves a 9.54% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 86.76% return.

APRP

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 1.84%
• YTD: 9.54%
• 6M: 10.64%
• 1Y: 18.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: -7.65%
• YTD: 86.76%
• 6M: 83.45%
• 1Y: 89.50%
• 3Y*: 27.10%
• 5Y*: 23.77%
• 10Y*: 13.38%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

APRP vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
APRP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April	9.54%	7.80%	10.28%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	86.76%	-5.44%	-6.96%

Correlation

The correlation between APRP and BNO is -0.31, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024	-0.07

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between APRP and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.07 to -0.31, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Return for Risk

APRP vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

APRP

APRP Risk / Return Rank: 98
APRP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
APRP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 57

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

APRP vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	APRP	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.29	2.17	+2.11
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	7.33	2.68	+4.66
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.08	1.37	+0.71
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	17.17	5.39	+11.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	76.71	10.23	+66.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

APRP vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current APRP Sharpe Ratio is 4.29, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of APRP and BNO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	APRP	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.29	2.17	+2.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	0.14	+1.23

Drawdowns

APRP vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum APRP drawdown since its inception was -13.66%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APRP and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	APRP	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.66%	-87.06%	+73.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.09%	-17.87%	+16.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.70%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-12.04%	+12.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.23%	-40.18%	+38.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.24%	9.43%	-9.19%

Volatility

APRP vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) is 1.17%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 15.03%. This indicates that APRP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BNO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	APRP	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.17%	15.03%	-13.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.36%	36.08%	-32.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.33%	41.56%	-37.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.50%	35.37%	-25.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.50%	36.68%	-27.18%

APRP vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

APRP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

APRP vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither APRP nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both APRP and BNO in my portfolio?

APRP and BNO have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, APRP or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (15.03%) compared to APRP (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, APRP dropped -13.66% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, APRP or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 89.50% vs 18.46% for APRP. On fees, APRP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, APRP has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, APRP or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 89.50% return vs 18.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, APRP or BNO?

APRP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, APRP or BNO?

APRP and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between APRP and BNO?

APRP is categorized as Options Trading, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for APRP and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APRP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 2.17), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.