RAAA vs. BNO

Last updated Jul 10, 2026

RAAA (Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - RAAA is a CLO fund actively managed by Reckoner, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. RAAA is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, RAAA returned 5.33% vs 37.27% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. RAAA charges 0.30%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.

Performance

RAAA vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF (RAAA) 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, RAAA achieves a 2.80% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 48.91% return.

RAAA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 2.51%
• YTD: 2.80%
• 1Y: 5.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: -3.21%
• 1M: -16.43%
• 6M: 44.07%
• YTD: 48.91%
• 1Y: 37.27%
• 3Y*: 16.98%
• 5Y*: 16.72%
• 10Y*: 11.87%

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

RAAA vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RAAA Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF	2.80%	2.52%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	48.91%	-7.90%

Correlation

The correlation between RAAA and BNO is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2025	-0.08

Return for Risk

RAAA vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RAAA

RAAA Risk / Return Rank: 97
RAAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
RAAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
RAAA Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RAAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RAAA Martin Ratio Rank: 98

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 30
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 32
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

RAAA vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF (RAAA) 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.

	RAAA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.03	0.90	+3.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.82	1.44	+4.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.10	1.18	+0.92
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.56	1.09	+6.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	42.18	3.28	+38.90

RAAA vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RAAA Sharpe Ratio is 4.03, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 0.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RAAA 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

RAAA vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RAAA drawdown since its inception was -0.71%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RAAA and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RAAA	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.71%	-87.06%	+86.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.71%	-34.46%	+33.75%
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	0.00%	-29.87%	+29.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.06%	-40.08%	+40.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.13%	11.39%	-11.26%

Volatility

RAAA vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF (RAAA) is 0.12%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 13.23%. This indicates that RAAA 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

	RAAA	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.12%	13.23%	-13.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.00%	38.39%	-37.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.33%	41.83%	-40.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.33%	35.88%	-34.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.33%	36.71%	-35.38%

RAAA vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RAAA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

RAAA vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

RAAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.21%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
RAAA Reckoner Leveraged AAA CLO ETF	5.21%	2.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RAAA and BNO in my portfolio?

RAAA and BNO have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RAAA or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (13.23%) compared to RAAA (0.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RAAA dropped -0.71% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, RAAA or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 37.27% vs 5.33% for RAAA. On fees, RAAA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, RAAA has been the lower-risk option at 0.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RAAA or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 37.27% return vs 5.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RAAA or BNO?

RAAA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

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

RAAA has the higher dividend yield at 5.21%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between RAAA and BNO?

RAAA is categorized as CLO, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Reckoner and USCF Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RAAA and 1.00% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RAAA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.03 vs 0.90), 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.