ELM vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ELM (Elm Market Navigator ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - ELM is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Elm, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. ELM is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, ELM returned 19.85% vs 91.89% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.20, they often move in opposite directions. ELM charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

ELM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ELM achieves a 7.56% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

ELM

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: 2.88%
• YTD: 7.56%
• 6M: 8.51%
• 1Y: 19.85%
• 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)

ELM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	7.56%	11.89%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	-10.27%

Correlation

The correlation between ELM and BNO is -0.35, 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	-0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2025	-0.20

The correlation between ELM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.35 (1 year) to -0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ELM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ELM

ELM Risk / Return Rank: 63
ELM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ELM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ELM Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ELM Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
ELM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

ELM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) 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.

	ELM	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	2.23	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	2.73	+0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.38	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.65	5.17	-2.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.00	9.76	+1.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ELM vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ELM Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ELM 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ELM	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.13	2.23	-0.10
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	1.49	0.14	+1.35

Drawdowns

ELM vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ELM drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ELM and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ELM	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.02%	-87.06%	+78.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-17.87%	+10.35%
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	-0.58%	-10.29%	+9.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.32%	-40.17%	+38.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	9.45%	-7.64%

Volatility

ELM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) is 2.59%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that ELM 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.

Volatility by Period

	ELM	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.59%	14.22%	-11.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.52%	36.10%	-28.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.38%	41.46%	-32.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.27%	35.38%	-25.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.27%	36.68%	-26.41%

ELM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ELM has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

ELM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

ELM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
ELM Elm Market Navigator ETF	2.52%	2.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ELM and BNO in my portfolio?

ELM and BNO have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ELM or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to ELM (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ELM dropped -9.02% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, ELM or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 19.85% for ELM. On fees, ELM is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, ELM has been the lower-risk option at 2.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ELM or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 91.89% return vs 19.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ELM or BNO?

ELM is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ELM or BNO?

ELM has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between ELM and BNO?

ELM is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Elm and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for ELM and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 2.13), 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.