LCOW vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LCOW (Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - LCOW is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LCOW returned 21.09% vs 91.89% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.28, they often move in opposite directions. LCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

LCOW vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) 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, LCOW achieves a 6.58% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

LCOW

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 5.51%
• YTD: 6.58%
• 6M: 6.94%
• 1Y: 21.09%
• 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)

LCOW vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	6.58%	20.51%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	9.39%

Correlation

The correlation between LCOW 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 May 8, 2025	-0.28

Return for Risk

LCOW vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCOW

LCOW Risk / Return Rank: 49
LCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
LCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
LCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 49
LCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
LCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 51

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

LCOW vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) 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.

	LCOW	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.23	-0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	2.73	-0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.38	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	5.17	-3.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.61	9.76	-1.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCOW vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCOW 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

	LCOW	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76	2.23	-0.47
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	2.15	0.14	+2.01

Drawdowns

LCOW vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCOW	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.34%	-87.06%	+76.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-17.87%	+7.53%
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	-0.55%	-10.29%	+9.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.38%	-40.17%	+38.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	9.45%	-6.99%

Volatility

LCOW vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) is 2.29%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that LCOW 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

	LCOW	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.29%	14.22%	-11.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.17%	36.10%	-26.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.05%	41.46%	-29.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.32%	35.38%	-23.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.32%	36.68%	-24.36%

LCOW vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCOW vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	0.50%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCOW and BNO in my portfolio?

LCOW 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.

Which is riskier, LCOW or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to LCOW (2.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCOW dropped -10.34% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, LCOW or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 21.09% for LCOW. On fees, LCOW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, LCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCOW or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 91.89% return vs 21.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCOW or BNO?

LCOW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

LCOW has the higher dividend yield at 0.50%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between LCOW and BNO?

LCOW is categorized as S&P 500, while BNO is Oil & Gas. LCOW tracks S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for LCOW and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.76), 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.