QTR vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTR returned 22.93%/yr vs 27.93%/yr for BNO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

QTR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) 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, QTR achieves a 17.64% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

QTR

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 10.52%
• YTD: 17.64%
• 6M: 15.72%
• 1Y: 33.76%
• 3Y*: 22.93%
• 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)

QTR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	17.64%	14.52%	21.46%	45.53%	-29.94%	4.16%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	-5.44%	9.67%	-3.43%	35.25%	13.39%

Correlation

The correlation between QTR 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 Aug 27, 2021	0.01

The correlation between QTR and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QTR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTR

QTR Risk / Return Rank: 64
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 68
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

QTR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) 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.

	QTR	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.23	+0.17
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	2.73	+0.50
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.38	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.76	5.17	-2.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.47	9.76	-0.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QTR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTR 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

	QTR	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.23	+0.17
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	0.68	0.14	+0.54

Drawdowns

QTR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTR drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTR and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTR	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-87.06%	+55.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.29%	-17.87%	+5.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.99%	-23.75%	+4.76%
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	-0.24%	-10.29%	+10.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-40.17%	+31.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.57%	9.45%	-5.88%

Volatility

QTR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) is 4.52%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that QTR 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

	QTR	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.52%	14.22%	-9.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	36.10%	-25.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.14%	41.46%	-27.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.10%	35.38%	-17.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.10%	36.68%	-18.58%

QTR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

QTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.96%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF	15.96%	18.77%	0.50%	0.53%	0.36%	1.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTR and BNO in my portfolio?

QTR 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.

Which is riskier, QTR or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to QTR (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, QTR or BNO?

On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 27.93% vs 22.93% for QTR. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, QTR has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTR or BNO?

Over the 3-year period, BNO has performed better with a 27.93% return vs 22.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTR or BNO?

QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between QTR and BNO?

QTR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while BNO is Oil & Gas. QTR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QTR and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 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.