CBON vs. BNO
CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - CBON is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CBON returned 2.93%/yr vs 13.60%/yr for BNO. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBON charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
CBON vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBON achieves a 5.41% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return. Over the past 10 years, CBON has underperformed BNO with an annualized return of 2.93%, while BNO has yielded a comparatively higher 13.60% annualized return.
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%
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%
CBON vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 5.41% | 5.46% | 1.85% | 2.92% | -7.99% | 5.93% | 12.01% | 2.67% | 1.88% | 6.96% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 90.47% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | 35.25% | 62.34% | -38.23% | 36.01% | -15.30% | 15.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between CBON and BNO is -0.22, 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 | -0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.06 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2014 | 0.06 |
The correlation between CBON and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.06 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CBON vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
CBON
BNO
CBON vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) 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.
| CBON | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.47 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.38 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.94 | 5.17 | +1.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 25.86 | 9.76 | +16.10 |
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
| CBON | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.70 | 2.23 | +0.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 0.69 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | 0.37 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.14 | +0.28 |
Drawdowns
CBON vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBON drawdown since its inception was -14.13%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBON and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBON | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.13% | -87.06% | +72.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.34% | -17.87% | +16.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.56% | -23.75% | +19.19% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.13% | -33.70% | +19.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.13% | -75.18% | +61.05% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -10.29% | +10.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.99% | -40.17% | +36.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.36% | 9.45% | -9.09% |
Volatility
CBON vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) is 0.91%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that CBON 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
| CBON | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.91% | 14.22% | -13.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.62% | 36.10% | -33.48% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.45% | 41.46% | -38.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.93% | 35.38% | -30.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.58% | 36.68% | -31.10% |
CBON vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CBON has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
CBON vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
CBON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 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
CBON and BNO have a correlation of -0.22, 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 CBON (0.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBON dropped -14.13% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 10-year performance, BNO leads with 13.60% vs 2.93% for CBON. On fees, CBON is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CBON has been the lower-risk option at 0.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, BNO has performed better with a 13.60% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CBON is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.
CBON has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
CBON is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while BNO is Oil & Gas. CBON tracks ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CBON and 0.90% for BNO.
CBON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 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 CBON 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