RAA vs. BNO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RAA (SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - RAA is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by SMI 3Fourteen, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. RAA is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, RAA returned 17.11% vs 62.83% for BNO. Their -0.04 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. RAA charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.

Performance

RAA vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) 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, RAA achieves a 7.64% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 77.90% return.

RAA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.27%
• 6M: 4.74%
• YTD: 7.64%
• 1Y: 17.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.97%

BNO

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: 27.00%
• 6M: 52.90%
• YTD: 77.90%
• 1Y: 62.83%
• 3Y*: 20.31%
• 5Y*: 20.89%
• 10Y*: 15.06%
• ALL TIME*: 4.31%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	$107.13M	$97.34M	$147.52M
RAA SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF	$1.35M	$1.42M	$1.60M

RAA vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RAA SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF	7.64%	11.92%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	77.90%	-5.41%

Correlation

The correlation between RAA and BNO is -0.15, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025	-0.04

The correlation between RAA and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to -0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RAA vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RAA

RAA Risk / Return Rank: 68
RAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
RAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
RAA Omega Ratio Rank: 65
RAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RAA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 52
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 55
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 45

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RAA vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	RAA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	1.32	+0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.14	1.90	+0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.24	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.74	1.70	+1.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.21	5.15	+3.06

RAA vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RAA Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RAA 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.

Drawdowns

RAA vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RAA drawdown since its inception was -11.96%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RAA and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RAA	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.96%	-87.06%	+75.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.91%	-34.46%	+28.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.46%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.46%	-16.21%	+12.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.64%	-39.99%	+38.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	11.86%	-9.89%

Volatility

RAA vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) is 2.57%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 17.47%. This indicates that RAA 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

	RAA	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.57%	17.47%	-14.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.37%	40.96%	-32.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.47%	44.54%	-34.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.64%	36.41%	-23.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.64%	36.98%	-24.34%

RAA vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RAA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

RAA vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

RAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.13%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
RAA SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF	2.13%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RAA and BNO in my portfolio?

RAA 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 is riskier, RAA or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (17.47%) compared to RAA (2.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RAA dropped -11.96% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, RAA or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 62.83% vs 17.11% for RAA. On fees, RAA is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, RAA has been the lower-risk option at 2.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RAA or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 62.83% return vs 17.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RAA or BNO?

RAA is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

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

RAA has the higher dividend yield at 2.13%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between RAA and BNO?

RAA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: SMI 3Fourteen and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RAA and 1.00% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 1.32), 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.