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

Performance

GGUS vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) 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, GGUS achieves a 7.56% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


GGUS

1D
-1.06%
1M
6.20%
YTD
7.56%
6M
7.02%
1Y
23.97%
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)

GGUS vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
GGUS
Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF
7.56%17.32%30.88%4.54%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
90.47%-5.44%9.67%-3.94%

Correlation

The correlation between GGUS and BNO is -0.30, 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

-0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2023

-0.07

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GGUS and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.07 to -0.30, 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

GGUS vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGUS
GGUS Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
GGUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GGUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
GGUS Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
GGUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
GGUS Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

GGUS vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) 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.


GGUSBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.38

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.62

5.17

-3.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.55

9.76

-4.21

GGUS vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGUS 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


GGUSBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.61

2.23

-0.62

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

1.30

0.14

+1.15

Drawdowns

GGUS vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGUS drawdown since its inception was -22.59%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGUS and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GGUSBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.59%

-87.06%

+64.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.91%

-17.87%

+2.96%

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

-1.28%

-10.29%

+9.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.20%

-40.17%

+36.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.33%

9.45%

-5.12%

Volatility

GGUS vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) is 3.41%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that GGUS 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


GGUSBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.41%

14.22%

-10.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.30%

36.10%

-24.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.00%

41.46%

-26.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.96%

35.38%

-16.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.96%

36.68%

-17.72%

GGUS vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGUS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

GGUS vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

GGUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GGUS
Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF
0.41%0.43%0.68%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GGUS and BNO have a correlation of -0.30, 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 GGUS (3.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GGUS dropped -22.59% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 23.97% for GGUS. On fees, GGUS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GGUS has been the lower-risk option at 3.41%. 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 23.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GGUS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

GGUS has the higher dividend yield at 0.41%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

GGUS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. GGUS tracks Russell 1000 Growth 40 Act Daily Capped Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GGUS and 0.90% for BNO.

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.61), 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 GGUS 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