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

Performance

CLSE vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) 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, CLSE achieves a 25.76% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


CLSE

1D
0.35%
1M
9.28%
YTD
25.76%
6M
28.57%
1Y
50.91%
3Y*
32.39%
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)

CLSE vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CLSE
Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF
25.76%20.44%35.54%17.54%-3.04%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
90.47%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%9.49%

Correlation

The correlation between CLSE and BNO is -0.20, 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

-0.20

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2022

0.04

The correlation between CLSE and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.04 (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

CLSE vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLSE
CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

CLSE vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) 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.


CLSEBNODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.84

2.23

+1.61

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

5.20

2.73

+2.48

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.67

1.38

+0.30

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

10.55

5.17

+5.38

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

39.58

9.76

+29.81

CLSE vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLSE Sharpe Ratio is 3.84, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLSE 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


CLSEBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.84

2.23

+1.61

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

1.59

0.14

+1.45

Drawdowns

CLSE vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLSE drawdown since its inception was -16.45%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLSE and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CLSEBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.45%

-87.06%

+70.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.85%

-17.87%

+13.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.45%

-23.75%

+7.30%

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%

-10.29%

+10.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.59%

-40.17%

+36.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.29%

9.45%

-8.16%

Volatility

CLSE vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) is 4.31%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that CLSE 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


CLSEBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

14.22%

-9.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.21%

36.10%

-25.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.32%

41.46%

-28.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.88%

35.38%

-21.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.88%

36.68%

-22.80%

CLSE vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLSE has a 1.56% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

CLSE vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

CLSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
CLSE
Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF
0.76%0.95%0.93%1.21%0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


CLSE and BNO have a correlation of -0.20, 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 CLSE (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLSE dropped -16.45% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 3-year performance, CLSE leads with 32.39% vs 27.93% for BNO. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, CLSE has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 32.39% return vs 27.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.56% for CLSE.

CLSE has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

CLSE is categorized as Long-Short, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Convergence Investment Partners and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 1.56% for CLSE and 0.90% for BNO.

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.84 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CLSE 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