MCDS vs. BNO
MCDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - MCDS is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by JPMorgan, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. MCDS is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, MCDS returned 21.68% vs 62.83% for BNO. Their -0.11 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. MCDS charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.
Performance
MCDS vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCDS achieves a 15.90% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 77.90% return.
MCDS
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 0.05%
- 6M
- 13.29%
- YTD
- 15.90%
- 1Y
- 21.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.65%
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%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $107.13M | $97.34M | $147.52M | |
| $117.48K | $57.47K | $28.02K |
MCDS vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF | 15.90% | 6.51% | 9.83% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 77.90% | -5.44% | -0.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCDS and BNO is -0.25, 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. | -0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2024 | -0.11 |
The correlation between MCDS and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.25 (1 year) to -0.11 (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
MCDS vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
MCDS
BNO
MCDS vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) 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.
| MCDS | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.24 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | 1.70 | +1.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.41 | 5.15 | +5.26 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCDS vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCDS drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCDS and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCDS | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.50% | -87.06% | +64.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.47% | -34.46% | +26.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -34.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -34.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.50% | -16.21% | +15.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.72% | -39.99% | +36.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.95% | 11.86% | -9.91% |
Volatility
MCDS vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) is 2.30%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 17.47%. This indicates that MCDS 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
| MCDS | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.30% | 17.47% | -15.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.90% | 40.96% | -31.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.31% | 44.54% | -31.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.58% | 36.41% | -19.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.58% | 36.98% | -20.40% |
MCDS vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCDS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCDS vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
MCDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF | 1.04% | 1.23% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCDS and BNO have a correlation of -0.25, 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 MCDS (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCDS dropped -22.50% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 62.83% vs 21.68% for MCDS. On fees, MCDS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, MCDS has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. 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 62.83% return vs 21.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MCDS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.
MCDS has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
MCDS is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCDS and 1.00% for BNO.
MCDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 1.32), 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 MCDS 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