PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CGMM vs. BNO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CGMM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGMM achieves a 10.58% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


CGMM

1D
-0.62%
1M
1.79%
YTD
10.58%
6M
11.78%
1Y
23.39%
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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGMM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CGMM and BNO is -0.23, 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

-0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2025

-0.08

The correlation between CGMM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to -0.08 (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

CGMM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGMM
CGMM Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
CGMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGMM Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
CGMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGMM Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CGMM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) 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.


CGMMBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.38

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.33

5.17

-2.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.94

9.76

-0.82

CGMM vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGMM 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CGMMBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.49

2.23

-0.74

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

0.81

0.14

+0.67

Drawdowns

CGMM vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGMM drawdown since its inception was -21.04%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGMM and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CGMMBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.04%

-87.06%

+66.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.09%

-17.87%

+7.78%

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

-0.62%

-10.29%

+9.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.25%

-40.17%

+36.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.62%

9.45%

-6.83%

Volatility

CGMM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) is 3.73%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that CGMM 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


CGMMBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.73%

14.22%

-10.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.79%

36.10%

-24.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.80%

41.46%

-25.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.29%

35.38%

-15.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.29%

36.68%

-16.39%

CGMM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGMM has a 0.51% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

CGMM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

CGMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


CGMM and BNO have a correlation of -0.23, 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 CGMM (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGMM dropped -21.04% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 23.39% for CGMM. On fees, CGMM is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, CGMM has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. 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 23.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CGMM is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

CGMM has the higher dividend yield at 0.36%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

CGMM is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.51% for CGMM and 0.90% for BNO.

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGMM 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