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

Performance

GIGB vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) 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, GIGB achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 77.90% return.


GIGB

1D
-0.20%
1M
-1.73%
6M
-0.97%
YTD
-0.61%
1Y
1.79%
3Y*
4.67%
5Y*
-0.35%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
2.32%

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
$1.70M$2.15M$3.17M

GIGB vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GIGB
Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
-0.61%7.58%1.68%8.80%-15.80%-1.64%9.86%15.05%-2.76%2.45%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
77.90%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%35.25%62.34%-38.23%36.01%-15.30%40.64%

Correlation

The correlation between GIGB and BNO is -0.44, 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.

-0.44

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

-0.23

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

-0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2017

-0.09

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GIGB and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.09 to -0.44, 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

GIGB vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GIGB
GIGB Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
GIGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GIGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
GIGB Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
GIGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
GIGB Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

GIGB vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) 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.


GIGBBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.24

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.91

1.70

-0.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.55

5.15

-2.60

GIGB vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIGB Sharpe Ratio is 0.61, which is lower than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIGB 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

GIGB vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIGB drawdown since its inception was -22.25%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIGB and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GIGBBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.25%

-87.06%

+64.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.87%

-34.46%

+31.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.43%

-34.46%

+29.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.25%

-34.46%

+12.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.21%

-16.21%

+14.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.54%

-39.99%

+34.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.03%

11.86%

-10.83%

Volatility

GIGB vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (GIGB) is 1.20%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 17.47%. This indicates that GIGB 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


GIGBBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.20%

17.47%

-16.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.35%

40.96%

-37.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.27%

44.54%

-40.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.25%

36.41%

-29.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.62%

36.98%

-29.36%

GIGB vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GIGB has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

GIGB vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

GIGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GIGB
Goldman Sachs Access Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
4.29%4.69%4.45%3.67%3.12%2.25%2.62%3.22%3.31%1.55%

Frequently Asked Questions


GIGB and BNO have a correlation of -0.44, 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 GIGB (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIGB dropped -22.25% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 20.89% vs -0.35% for GIGB. On fees, GIGB is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, GIGB has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. 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 -0.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GIGB is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

GIGB has the higher dividend yield at 4.29%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

GIGB is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while BNO is Oil & Gas. GIGB tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index, while BNO tracks Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for GIGB and 1.00% for BNO.

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.61), 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 GIGB 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