REMG vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

REMG (Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - REMG is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Russell, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. REMG is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, REMG returned 59.26% vs 91.89% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.29, they often move in opposite directions. REMG charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

REMG vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) 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, REMG achieves a 29.45% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

REMG

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 9.88%
• YTD: 29.45%
• 6M: 32.57%
• 1Y: 59.26%
• 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)

REMG vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
REMG Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF	29.45%	24.09%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	5.16%

Correlation

The correlation between REMG and BNO is -0.30, 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	-0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2025	-0.29

Return for Risk

REMG vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

REMG

REMG Risk / Return Rank: 84
REMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
REMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
REMG Omega Ratio Rank: 85
REMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
REMG Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

REMG vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) 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.

	REMG	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.88	2.23	+0.65
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	2.73	+0.99
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.38	+0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.21	5.17	-0.95
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.07	9.76	+7.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

REMG vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current REMG Sharpe Ratio is 2.88, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of REMG 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

	REMG	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.88	2.23	+0.65
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	2.93	0.14	+2.79

Drawdowns

REMG vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum REMG drawdown since its inception was -14.13%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for REMG and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	REMG	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.13%	-87.06%	+72.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.13%	-17.87%	+3.74%
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	-1.25%	-10.29%	+9.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.94%	-40.17%	+38.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	9.45%	-5.97%

Volatility

REMG vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) is 8.89%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that REMG 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

	REMG	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.89%	14.22%	-5.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.92%	36.10%	-18.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.66%	41.46%	-20.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.62%	35.38%	-14.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.62%	36.68%	-16.06%

REMG vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

REMG has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

REMG vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

REMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
REMG Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.06%	1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both REMG and BNO in my portfolio?

REMG and BNO have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, REMG or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to REMG (8.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, REMG dropped -14.13% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, REMG or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 59.26% for REMG. On fees, REMG is cheaper at 0.64% per year. On volatility, REMG has been the lower-risk option at 8.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, REMG or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 91.89% return vs 59.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, REMG or BNO?

REMG is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

REMG has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between REMG and BNO?

REMG is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Russell and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for REMG and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

REMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.88 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.