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

Performance

MOOD vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD) 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, MOOD achieves a 12.19% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 80.79% return.


MOOD

1D
-2.21%
1M
-0.65%
YTD
12.19%
6M
14.07%
1Y
32.89%
3Y*
19.71%
5Y*
10Y*

BNO

1D
-2.44%
1M
-4.35%
YTD
80.79%
6M
73.97%
1Y
82.92%
3Y*
25.89%
5Y*
22.87%
10Y*
12.62%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MOOD vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
MOOD
Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF
12.19%30.39%12.53%12.56%-2.90%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
80.79%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%-11.24%

Correlation

The correlation between MOOD and BNO is -0.17, 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

-0.17

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2022

0.13

The correlation between MOOD and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.13 (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

MOOD vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOOD
MOOD Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MOOD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOOD Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOOD Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
MOOD Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOOD Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

MOOD vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD) 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.


MOODBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.34

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.40

4.66

-1.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.54

8.73

+1.81

MOOD vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOOD Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOOD 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


MOODBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.31

2.00

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.30

0.13

+1.17

Drawdowns

MOOD vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOOD drawdown since its inception was -14.34%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOOD and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MOODBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.34%

-87.06%

+72.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.71%

-17.87%

+8.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.71%

-23.75%

+14.04%

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

-2.53%

-14.85%

+12.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.32%

-40.16%

+37.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

9.53%

-6.40%

Volatility

MOOD vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD) is 3.65%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 11.71%. This indicates that MOOD 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


MOODBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.65%

11.71%

-8.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.54%

36.33%

-23.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.30%

41.63%

-27.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.11%

35.41%

-23.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.11%

36.69%

-24.58%

MOOD vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOOD has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

MOOD vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

MOOD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MOOD
Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF
0.36%0.40%1.33%1.34%1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


MOOD and BNO have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BNO has higher volatility (11.71%) compared to MOOD (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOOD dropped -14.34% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 25.89% vs 19.71% for MOOD. On fees, MOOD is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, MOOD has been the lower-risk option at 3.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, BNO has performed better with a 25.89% return vs 19.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MOOD is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

MOOD has the higher dividend yield at 0.36%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

MOOD is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Relative Sentiment and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for MOOD and 0.90% for BNO.

MOOD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 2.00), 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 MOOD 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