ASIA vs. BNO
ASIA (Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - ASIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. ASIA is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, ASIA returned 66.09% vs 91.89% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. ASIA charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
ASIA vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASIA achieves a 33.47% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.
ASIA
- 1D
- -1.35%
- 1M
- 11.70%
- YTD
- 33.47%
- 6M
- 38.00%
- 1Y
- 66.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BNO
- 1D
- 1.99%
- 1M
- -10.29%
- YTD
- 90.47%
- 6M
- 86.00%
- 1Y
- 91.89%
- 3Y*
- 27.93%
- 5Y*
- 24.16%
- 10Y*
- 13.60%
ASIA vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF | 33.47% | 32.06% | 3.41% | 0.01% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 90.47% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -14.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASIA and BNO is -0.29, 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 | -0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023 | -0.00 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between ASIA and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.00 to -0.29, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ASIA vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
ASIA
BNO
ASIA vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) 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.
| ASIA | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.38 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.59 | 5.17 | -0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.09 | 9.76 | +7.33 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ASIA | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.08 | 2.23 | +0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.69 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.37 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.24 | 0.14 | +1.10 |
Drawdowns
ASIA vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASIA drawdown since its inception was -23.95%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIA and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASIA | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.95% | -87.06% | +63.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.47% | -17.87% | +3.40% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.35% | -10.29% | +8.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.85% | -40.17% | +35.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.88% | 9.45% | -5.57% |
Volatility
ASIA vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) is 9.93%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that ASIA 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASIA | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.93% | 14.22% | -4.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.57% | 36.10% | -17.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.56% | 41.46% | -19.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.24% | 35.38% | -15.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.24% | 36.68% | -16.44% |
ASIA vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASIA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASIA vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
ASIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF | 0.78% | 1.05% | 0.58% | 0.12% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASIA and BNO have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to ASIA (9.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASIA dropped -23.95% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 66.09% for ASIA. On fees, ASIA is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ASIA has been the lower-risk option at 9.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 91.89% return vs 66.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASIA is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.
ASIA has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
ASIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ASIA and 0.90% for BNO.
ASIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 vs 2.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for ASIA and BNO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer