RMCA vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RMCA (Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - RMCA is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Rockefeller, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. RMCA is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, RMCA returned 7.23% vs 88.71% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. RMCA charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

RMCA vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) 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, RMCA achieves a 2.49% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 85.31% return.

RMCA

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 2.49%
• 6M: 2.89%
• 1Y: 7.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: -9.80%
• YTD: 85.31%
• 6M: 79.66%
• 1Y: 88.71%
• 3Y*: 26.74%
• 5Y*: 23.48%
• 10Y*: 13.13%

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

RMCA vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	2.49%	2.35%	-0.14%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	85.31%	-5.44%	-3.79%

Correlation

The correlation between RMCA and BNO is -0.23, 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	-0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2024	-0.18

Return for Risk

RMCA vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMCA

RMCA Risk / Return Rank: 63
RMCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
RMCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RMCA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RMCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
RMCA Martin Ratio Rank: 59

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 61
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.

RMCA vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) 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.

	RMCA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.15	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	2.65	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.36	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.09	4.99	-1.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.25	9.39	+0.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RMCA vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMCA Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMCA 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

	RMCA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.94	2.15	-0.21
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.67	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.36	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	0.14	+0.35

Drawdowns

RMCA vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMCA drawdown since its inception was -5.95%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMCA and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMCA	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.95%	-87.06%	+81.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.35%	-17.87%	+15.52%
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	-0.04%	-12.72%	+12.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-40.16%	+38.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.71%	9.48%	-8.77%

Volatility

RMCA vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) is 1.15%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.12%. This indicates that RMCA 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

	RMCA	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.15%	14.12%	-12.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.49%	36.21%	-33.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.76%	41.56%	-37.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.38%	35.40%	-30.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.38%	36.69%	-31.31%

RMCA vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMCA has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMCA vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

RMCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.35%, 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%
RMCA Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF	4.35%	4.51%	1.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMCA and BNO in my portfolio?

RMCA and BNO have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMCA or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.12%) compared to RMCA (1.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMCA dropped -5.95% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, RMCA or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 88.71% vs 7.23% for RMCA. On fees, RMCA is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, RMCA has been the lower-risk option at 1.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RMCA or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 88.71% return vs 7.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RMCA or BNO?

RMCA is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

RMCA has the higher dividend yield at 4.35%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between RMCA and BNO?

RMCA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Rockefeller and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for RMCA and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.94), 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.