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

Performance

FLCB vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) 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, FLCB achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 77.90% return.


FLCB

1D
-0.31%
1M
-1.27%
6M
-0.85%
YTD
-0.55%
1Y
1.88%
3Y*
3.97%
5Y*
-0.49%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
0.74%

BNO

1D
1.45%
1M
27.00%
6M
52.90%
YTD
77.90%
1Y
62.83%
3Y*
20.31%
5Y*
20.89%
10Y*
15.06%
ALL TIME*
4.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$107.13M$97.34M$147.52M
$9.07M$9.57M$9.69M

FLCB vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FLCB
Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF
-0.55%6.95%1.59%5.72%-13.54%-1.73%7.66%0.65%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
77.90%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%35.25%62.34%-38.23%9.39%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCB and BNO is -0.41, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.23

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

-0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2019

-0.16

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between FLCB and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.16 to -0.41, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

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

FLCB vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FLCB
FLCB Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
FLCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCB Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCB Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FLCB vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


FLCBBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.24

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.96

1.70

-0.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.43

5.15

-2.72

FLCB vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCB Sharpe Ratio is 0.73, which is lower than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCB 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...

Drawdowns

FLCB vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCB drawdown since its inception was -18.82%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCB and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCBBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.82%

-87.06%

+68.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.85%

-34.46%

+31.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.03%

-34.46%

+29.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.48%

-34.46%

+15.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.16%

-16.21%

+13.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.52%

-39.99%

+33.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.13%

11.86%

-10.73%

Volatility

FLCB vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF (FLCB) is 0.92%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 17.47%. This indicates that FLCB 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


FLCBBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.92%

17.47%

-16.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.93%

40.96%

-38.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.77%

44.54%

-40.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.75%

36.41%

-30.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.47%

36.98%

-31.51%

FLCB vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLCB vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

FLCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.38%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FLCB
Franklin U.S. Core Bond ETF
3.99%4.19%4.10%3.40%2.73%2.28%3.24%0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLCB and BNO have a correlation of -0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BNO has higher volatility (17.47%) compared to FLCB (0.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCB dropped -18.82% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 20.89% vs -0.49% for FLCB. On fees, FLCB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLCB has been the lower-risk option at 0.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BNO has performed better with a 20.89% return vs -0.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLCB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

FLCB has the higher dividend yield at 3.99%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

FLCB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLCB and 1.00% for BNO.

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.73), 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 FLCB 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