BENJ vs. CBON
BENJ (Horizon Landmark ETF) and CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BENJ is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Horizon, while CBON is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. BENJ is actively managed, while CBON is passively managed. Over the past year, BENJ returned 3.81% vs 9.26% for CBON. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. BENJ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CBON.
Performance
BENJ vs. CBON - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BENJ achieves a 1.47% return, which is significantly lower than CBON's 5.41% return.
BENJ
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 1.47%
- 6M
- 1.83%
- 1Y
- 3.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBON
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 1.75%
- YTD
- 5.41%
- 6M
- 6.88%
- 1Y
- 9.26%
- 3Y*
- 5.05%
- 5Y*
- 2.03%
- 10Y*
- 2.93%
BENJ vs. CBON - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BENJ Horizon Landmark ETF | 1.47% | 3.75% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 5.41% | 5.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between BENJ and CBON is -0.11, 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 | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2025 | -0.14 |
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
BENJ vs. CBON — Risk / Return Rank
BENJ
CBON
BENJ vs. CBON - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon Landmark ETF (BENJ) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON). 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.
| BENJ | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +5.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 5.02 | 1.54 | +3.48 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.79 | 6.94 | +2.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 46.19 | 25.86 | +20.34 |
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
| BENJ | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.70 | 2.70 | +3.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.41 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 6.43 | 0.42 | +6.01 |
Drawdowns
BENJ vs. CBON - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BENJ drawdown since its inception was -0.39%, smaller than the maximum CBON drawdown of -14.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BENJ and CBON.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BENJ | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.39% | -14.13% | +13.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.39% | -1.34% | +0.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.56% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.02% | +0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.02% | -3.99% | +3.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.08% | 0.36% | -0.28% |
Volatility
BENJ vs. CBON - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Horizon Landmark ETF (BENJ) is 0.06%, while VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) has a volatility of 0.91%. This indicates that BENJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CBON based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BENJ | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.06% | 0.91% | -0.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.23% | 2.62% | -2.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.67% | 3.45% | -2.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.60% | 4.93% | -4.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.60% | 5.58% | -4.98% |
BENJ vs. CBON - Expense Ratio Comparison
BENJ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CBON's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
BENJ vs. CBON - Dividend Comparison
BENJ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BENJ Horizon Landmark ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 1.52% | 1.66% | 2.15% | 3.01% | 2.70% | 3.05% | 2.87% | 3.87% | 3.39% | 3.33% | 3.25% | 2.78% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BENJ and CBON have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CBON has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to BENJ (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BENJ dropped -0.39% vs CBON's -14.13%.
On 1-year performance, CBON leads with 9.26% vs 3.81% for BENJ. On fees, BENJ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, BENJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CBON has performed better with a 9.26% return vs 3.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BENJ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CBON.
CBON has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.00% for BENJ.
BENJ is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while CBON is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Horizon and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for BENJ and 0.50% for CBON.
BENJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.70 vs 2.70), 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 BENJ and CBON
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