LRNZ vs. BNO
LRNZ (TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - LRNZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TrueMark Investments, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. LRNZ is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LRNZ returned 8.37%/yr vs 23.48%/yr for BNO. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LRNZ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
LRNZ vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LRNZ achieves a 29.07% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 85.31% return.
LRNZ
- 1D
- -1.41%
- 1M
- 29.38%
- YTD
- 29.07%
- 6M
- 29.15%
- 1Y
- 45.73%
- 3Y*
- 24.70%
- 5Y*
- 8.37%
- 10Y*
- —
BNO
- 1D
- -2.71%
- 1M
- -9.80%
- YTD
- 85.31%
- 6M
- 79.66%
- 1Y
- 88.71%
- 3Y*
- 26.74%
- 5Y*
- 23.48%
- 10Y*
- 13.13%
LRNZ vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | 29.07% | 22.27% | 2.01% | 67.11% | -51.46% | -0.96% | 87.82% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 85.31% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | 35.25% | 62.34% | -24.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRNZ and BNO is -0.16, 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 | -0.16 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020 | 0.07 |
The correlation between LRNZ and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
LRNZ vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
LRNZ
BNO
LRNZ vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) 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.
| LRNZ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.36 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.71 | 4.99 | -3.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.19 | 9.39 | -5.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LRNZ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59 | 2.15 | -0.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | 0.67 | -0.44 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.36 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 0.14 | +0.27 |
Drawdowns
LRNZ vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRNZ drawdown since its inception was -61.33%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRNZ and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRNZ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.33% | -87.06% | +25.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.89% | -17.87% | -9.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.10% | -23.75% | -9.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.33% | -33.70% | -27.63% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.94% | -12.72% | +8.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.65% | -40.16% | +13.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.94% | 9.48% | +1.46% |
Volatility
LRNZ vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) is 10.68%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.12%. This indicates that LRNZ 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
| LRNZ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.68% | 14.12% | -3.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 23.24% | 36.21% | -12.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.90% | 41.56% | -12.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.26% | 35.40% | +1.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.63% | 36.69% | +0.94% |
LRNZ vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRNZ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRNZ vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
Neither LRNZ nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LRNZ TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.13% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LRNZ and BNO have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BNO has higher volatility (14.12%) compared to LRNZ (10.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRNZ dropped -61.33% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 23.48% vs 8.37% for LRNZ. On fees, LRNZ is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, LRNZ has been the lower-risk option at 10.68%. 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 23.48% return vs 8.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LRNZ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.
LRNZ and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
LRNZ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: TrueMark Investments and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for LRNZ and 0.90% for BNO.
BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.59), 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 LRNZ 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