NRGU vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - NRGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%), while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, NRGU returned 156.47% vs 82.92% for BNO. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NRGU charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

NRGU vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) 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, NRGU achieves a 111.49% return, which is significantly higher than BNO's 80.79% return.

NRGU

• 1D: -6.40%
• 1M: 4.99%
• YTD: 111.49%
• 6M: 82.61%
• 1Y: 156.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

NRGU vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	111.49%	-33.00%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	80.79%	-9.64%

Correlation

The correlation between NRGU and BNO is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.68

The correlation between NRGU and BNO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NRGU vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 61
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 51
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 57

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 62
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 57
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

NRGU vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) 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.

	NRGU	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.00	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	2.53	-0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.34	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	4.66	-0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.76	8.73	+1.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NRGU vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRGU Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRGU 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

	NRGU	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	2.00	+0.10
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	0.35	0.13	+0.22

Drawdowns

NRGU vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRGU drawdown since its inception was -57.50%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRGU and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NRGU	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.50%	-87.06%	+29.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.95%	-17.87%	-22.08%
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	-27.06%	-14.85%	-12.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.41%	-40.16%	+14.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.10%	9.53%	+6.57%

Volatility

NRGU vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a higher volatility of 26.47% compared to United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) at 11.71%. This indicates that NRGU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NRGU	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.47%	11.71%	+14.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	61.54%	36.33%	+25.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	75.00%	41.63%	+33.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	89.08%	35.41%	+53.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	89.08%	36.69%	+52.39%

NRGU vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

NRGU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

NRGU vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither NRGU nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NRGU and BNO in my portfolio?

NRGU and BNO have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NRGU or BNO?

NRGU has higher volatility (26.47%) compared to BNO (11.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NRGU dropped -57.50% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, NRGU or BNO?

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 156.47% vs 82.92% for BNO. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, BNO has been the lower-risk option at 11.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NRGU or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 156.47% return vs 82.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NRGU or BNO?

BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for NRGU.

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

NRGU and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NRGU and BNO?

NRGU is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%), while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for NRGU and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 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.