PBMR vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - PBMR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. PBMR is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, PBMR returned 13.38% vs 88.71% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. PBMR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

PBMR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) 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, PBMR achieves a 5.16% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 85.31% return.

PBMR

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 1.41%
• YTD: 5.16%
• 6M: 6.05%
• 1Y: 13.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: -9.80%
• YTD: 85.31%
• 6M: 79.66%
• 1Y: 88.71%
• 3Y*: 26.74%
• 5Y*: 23.48%
• 10Y*: 13.13%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBMR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	5.16%	10.89%	9.41%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	85.31%	-5.44%	-1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between PBMR and BNO is -0.34, 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	-0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2024	-0.08

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between PBMR and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.08 to -0.34, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Return for Risk

PBMR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBMR

PBMR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
PBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
PBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
PBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 61
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.

PBMR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) 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.

	PBMR	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.12	2.15	+0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.75	2.65	+2.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.69	1.36	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.04	4.99	-0.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.69	9.39	+14.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBMR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBMR Sharpe Ratio is 3.12, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBMR 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

	PBMR	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.12	2.15	+0.97
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.67	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.36	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.74	0.14	+1.60

Drawdowns

PBMR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBMR drawdown since its inception was -7.64%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBMR and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBMR	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-87.06%	+79.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.33%	-17.87%	+14.54%
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	-0.05%	-12.72%	+12.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.50%	-40.16%	+39.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.57%	9.48%	-8.91%

Volatility

PBMR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) is 0.76%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.12%. This indicates that PBMR 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

	PBMR	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.76%	14.12%	-13.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.39%	36.21%	-32.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.31%	41.56%	-37.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.60%	35.40%	-28.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.60%	36.69%	-30.09%

PBMR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBMR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBMR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBMR nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBMR and BNO in my portfolio?

PBMR and BNO have a correlation of -0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBMR or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.12%) compared to PBMR (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBMR dropped -7.64% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, PBMR or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 88.71% vs 13.38% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBMR or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 88.71% return vs 13.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBMR or BNO?

PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

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

What is the main difference between PBMR and BNO?

PBMR is categorized as Options Trading, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBMR and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 2.15), 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.