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

Performance

LQTI vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) 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, LQTI achieves a 0.16% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


LQTI

1D
-0.26%
1M
0.41%
YTD
0.16%
6M
-0.04%
1Y
5.69%
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)

LQTI vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LQTI and BNO is -0.37, 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

-0.37

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025

-0.29

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

LQTI vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQTI
LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

LQTI vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) 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.


LQTIBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.38

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.68

5.17

-3.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.15

9.76

-4.61

LQTI vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQTI Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQTI 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


LQTIBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.12

2.23

-1.11

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

0.88

0.14

+0.74

Drawdowns

LQTI vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQTI drawdown since its inception was -3.41%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQTI and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LQTIBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.41%

-87.06%

+83.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.41%

-17.87%

+14.46%

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

-1.44%

-10.29%

+8.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.88%

-40.17%

+39.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.11%

9.45%

-8.34%

Volatility

LQTI vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) is 1.65%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that LQTI 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


LQTIBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.65%

14.22%

-12.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.02%

36.10%

-32.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.10%

41.46%

-36.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.97%

35.38%

-29.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.97%

36.68%

-30.71%

LQTI vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQTI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

LQTI vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

LQTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.11%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


LQTI and BNO have a correlation of -0.37, 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 LQTI (1.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LQTI dropped -3.41% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 5.69% for LQTI. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.65%. 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 5.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

LQTI has the higher dividend yield at 9.11%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

LQTI is categorized as Derivative Income, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LQTI and 0.90% for BNO.

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.12), 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 LQTI 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