FFSM vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FFSM (Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - FFSM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. FFSM is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FFSM returned 10.42%/yr vs 23.77%/yr for BNO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FFSM charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

FFSM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) 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, FFSM achieves a 18.72% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 86.76% return.

FFSM

• 1D: 1.65%
• 1M: 2.13%
• YTD: 18.72%
• 6M: 20.25%
• 1Y: 40.12%
• 3Y*: 21.36%
• 5Y*: 10.42%
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: -7.65%
• YTD: 86.76%
• 6M: 83.45%
• 1Y: 89.50%
• 3Y*: 27.10%
• 5Y*: 23.77%
• 10Y*: 13.38%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FFSM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF	18.72%	14.89%	14.38%	17.30%	-16.35%	19.77%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	86.76%	-5.44%	9.67%	-3.43%	35.25%	42.34%

Correlation

The correlation between FFSM and BNO is -0.27, 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	-0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.02
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021	0.12

The correlation between FFSM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.27 (1 year) to 0.12 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FFSM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFSM

FFSM Risk / Return Rank: 70
FFSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FFSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FFSM Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FFSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
FFSM Martin Ratio Rank: 79

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

FFSM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) 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.

	FFSM	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.24	2.17	+0.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.14	2.68	+0.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.37	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	5.39	-1.55
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.60	10.23	+5.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFSM vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFSM Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFSM 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

	FFSM	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.24	2.17	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	0.68	-0.17
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.14	+0.45

Drawdowns

FFSM vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFSM drawdown since its inception was -26.65%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFSM and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFSM	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.65%	-87.06%	+60.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.37%	-17.87%	+7.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.78%	-23.75%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.65%	-33.70%	+7.05%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-12.04%	+11.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.86%	-40.18%	+32.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.55%	9.43%	-6.88%

Volatility

FFSM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) is 5.78%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 15.03%. This indicates that FFSM 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

	FFSM	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.78%	15.03%	-9.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.99%	36.08%	-22.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.96%	41.56%	-23.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.66%	35.37%	-14.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.58%	36.68%	-16.10%

FFSM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFSM has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFSM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

FFSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF	0.46%	0.56%	0.62%	0.56%	0.58%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFSM and BNO in my portfolio?

FFSM and BNO have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFSM or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (15.03%) compared to FFSM (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFSM dropped -26.65% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, FFSM or BNO?

On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 23.77% vs 10.42% for FFSM. On fees, FFSM is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, FFSM has been the lower-risk option at 5.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFSM or BNO?

Over the 5-year period, BNO has performed better with a 23.77% return vs 10.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFSM or BNO?

FFSM is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

FFSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.46%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between FFSM and BNO?

FFSM is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for FFSM and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 2.17), 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.