PCEM vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PCEM (Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - PCEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Polen Capital, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. PCEM is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. PCEM charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

PCEM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF (PCEM) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PCEM

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 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)

PCEM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCEM Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF	6.00%	12.55%	0.32%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	-5.44%	9.07%

Correlation

The correlation between PCEM and BNO is -0.15, 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	-0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 12, 2024	-0.00

The correlation between PCEM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to -0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PCEM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

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.

PCEM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF (PCEM) 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCEM	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.23	—
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	—	0.14	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	PCEM	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-87.06%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-17.87%	—
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	—	-10.29%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-40.17%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	9.45%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCEM	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	14.22%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	36.10%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	41.46%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	35.38%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	36.68%	—

PCEM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCEM has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCEM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

PCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PCEM Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCEM and BNO in my portfolio?

PCEM and BNO have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PCEM or BNO?

On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCEM or BNO?

BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PCEM.

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

PCEM has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between PCEM and BNO?

PCEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Polen Capital and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for PCEM and 0.90% for BNO.