IRVH vs. BNO
IRVH (Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - IRVH is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund actively managed by Global X, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. IRVH is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IRVH returned 0.01%/yr vs 19.86%/yr for BNO. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. IRVH charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.
Performance
IRVH vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IRVH achieves a -4.36% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 52.26% return.
IRVH
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- -1.18%
- YTD
- -4.36%
- 6M
- -4.00%
- 1Y
- -2.13%
- 3Y*
- 0.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BNO
- 1D
- -1.73%
- 1M
- -21.60%
- YTD
- 52.26%
- 6M
- 50.77%
- 1Y
- 30.19%
- 3Y*
- 19.86%
- 5Y*
- 17.50%
- 10Y*
- 11.40%
IRVH vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF | -4.36% | 7.71% | -5.49% | 0.83% | -6.69% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 52.26% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | -8.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between IRVH and BNO is -0.12, 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 | -0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 6, 2022 | -0.05 |
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
IRVH vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
IRVH
BNO
IRVH vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH) 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.
| IRVH | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 1.16 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.36 | 1.07 | -1.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.82 | 3.33 | -4.15 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IRVH vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IRVH drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IRVH and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IRVH | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.98% | -87.06% | +72.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.96% | -28.29% | +22.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.03% | -28.29% | +20.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.28% | -28.29% | +17.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.72% | -40.10% | +30.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.60% | 10.51% | -7.91% |
Volatility
IRVH vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH) is 1.09%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 10.98%. This indicates that IRVH 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
| IRVH | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.09% | 10.98% | -9.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.35% | 37.28% | -33.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.85% | 41.73% | -36.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.80% | 35.65% | -26.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.80% | 36.71% | -27.91% |
IRVH vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
IRVH has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.
Dividends
IRVH vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
IRVH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.62%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF | 5.62% | 4.89% | 3.34% | 3.69% | 2.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IRVH and BNO have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BNO has higher volatility (10.98%) compared to IRVH (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IRVH dropped -14.98% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 19.86% vs 0.01% for IRVH. On fees, IRVH is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, IRVH has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BNO has performed better with a 19.86% return vs 0.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IRVH is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.
IRVH has the higher dividend yield at 5.62%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
IRVH is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Global X and USCF Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IRVH and 1.00% for BNO.
BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.73 vs -0.44), 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.
Find the right allocation for IRVH 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