MSTQ vs. BNO
MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - MSTQ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. MSTQ is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MSTQ returned 24.11%/yr vs 27.93%/yr for BNO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MSTQ charges 1.59%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
MSTQ vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MSTQ achieves a 17.40% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.
MSTQ
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 9.02%
- YTD
- 17.40%
- 6M
- 15.69%
- 1Y
- 31.81%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 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%
MSTQ vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF | 17.40% | 20.57% | 19.58% | 43.10% | -21.67% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 90.47% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | 3.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between MSTQ and BNO is -0.28, 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 | -0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2022 | 0.01 |
The correlation between MSTQ and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.01 (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
MSTQ vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
MSTQ
BNO
MSTQ vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) 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.
| MSTQ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.38 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.58 | 5.17 | -2.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.04 | 9.76 | -1.72 |
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
| MSTQ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | 2.23 | 0.00 |
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 | 0.87 | 0.14 | +0.73 |
Drawdowns
MSTQ vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MSTQ drawdown since its inception was -31.05%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSTQ and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MSTQ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.05% | -87.06% | +56.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.39% | -17.87% | +5.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.22% | -23.75% | +8.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.21% | -10.29% | +10.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.62% | -40.17% | +31.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.97% | 9.45% | -5.48% |
Volatility
MSTQ vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) is 4.25%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that MSTQ 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
| MSTQ | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.25% | 14.22% | -9.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.58% | 36.10% | -25.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.35% | 41.46% | -27.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.85% | 35.38% | -16.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.85% | 36.68% | -17.83% |
MSTQ vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MSTQ has a 1.59% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
MSTQ vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.90%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF | 11.90% | 13.97% | 3.72% | 0.77% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MSTQ and BNO have a correlation of -0.28, 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 MSTQ (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSTQ dropped -31.05% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 27.93% vs 24.11% for MSTQ. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, MSTQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. 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 27.93% return vs 24.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.
MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 11.90%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
MSTQ is categorized as Options Trading, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 1.59% for MSTQ and 0.90% for BNO.
MSTQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 2.23), 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 MSTQ 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