MFSG vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MFSG (MFS Active Growth ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - MFSG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by MFS, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. MFSG is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, MFSG returned 21.54% vs 91.89% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. MFSG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

MFSG vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) 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, MFSG achieves a 7.55% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

MFSG

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: 4.46%
• YTD: 7.55%
• 6M: 7.63%
• 1Y: 21.54%
• 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)

MFSG vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MFSG MFS Active Growth ETF	7.55%	14.51%	-2.74%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	-5.44%	3.49%

Correlation

The correlation between MFSG and BNO is -0.29, 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	-0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2024	-0.12

The correlation between MFSG and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.29 (1 year) to -0.12 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MFSG vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFSG

MFSG Risk / Return Rank: 35
MFSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
MFSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
MFSG Omega Ratio Rank: 37
MFSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
MFSG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

MFSG vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) 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.

	MFSG	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.35	2.23	-0.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	2.73	-0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.38	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.34	5.17	-3.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.66	9.76	-5.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MFSG vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFSG Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFSG 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

	MFSG	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.35	2.23	-0.88
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	0.60	0.14	+0.46

Drawdowns

MFSG vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFSG drawdown since its inception was -23.24%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFSG and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFSG	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.24%	-87.06%	+63.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.15%	-17.87%	+1.72%
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	-1.01%	-10.29%	+9.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.67%	-40.17%	+35.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.63%	9.45%	-4.82%

Volatility

MFSG vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) is 3.71%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that MFSG 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

	MFSG	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.71%	14.22%	-10.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.41%	36.10%	-23.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.00%	41.46%	-25.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.69%	35.38%	-13.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.69%	36.68%	-14.99%

MFSG vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

MFSG vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

MFSG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
MFSG MFS Active Growth ETF	0.07%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFSG and BNO in my portfolio?

MFSG and BNO have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MFSG or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to MFSG (3.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFSG dropped -23.24% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, MFSG or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 21.54% for MFSG. On fees, MFSG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MFSG has been the lower-risk option at 3.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MFSG or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 91.89% return vs 21.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFSG or BNO?

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

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

MFSG has the higher dividend yield at 0.07%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between MFSG and BNO?

MFSG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: MFS and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MFSG and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.35), 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.