PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ROM vs. BNO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ROM vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ROM (ProShares Ultra Technology) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - ROM is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Index (200%), while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ROM returned 42.70%/yr vs 13.60%/yr for BNO. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ROM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

ROM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ROM achieves a 77.72% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return. Over the past 10 years, ROM has outperformed BNO with an annualized return of 42.70%, while BNO has yielded a comparatively lower 13.60% annualized return.

ROM

1D
-2.01%
1M
45.36%
YTD
77.72%
6M
74.45%
1Y
152.07%
3Y*
59.24%
5Y*
31.70%
10Y*
42.70%

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)

ROM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ROM
ProShares Ultra Technology		77.72%35.63%31.65%130.70%-63.86%77.75%80.42%102.10%-9.89%81.11%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP		90.47%-5.44%9.67%-3.43%35.25%62.34%-38.23%36.01%-15.30%15.43%

Correlation

The correlation between ROM 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.05

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2010

0.18

The correlation between ROM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to 0.18 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

ProShares Ultra Technology

United States Brent Oil Fund LP

Often compared with ROM:
ROM vs. QLDROM vs. TECLROM vs. TQQQROM vs. UPROROM vs. USAROM vs. WEBLROM vs. SOXX
Often compared with BNO:
BNO vs. USOBNO vs. XLEBNO vs. USLBNO vs. BOILBNO vs. UNGBNO vs. UCOBNO vs. XOM

Return for Risk

ROM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ROM
ROM Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
ROM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ROM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
ROM Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ROM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
ROM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ROM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) 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.

ROMBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.66
2.23

+1.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.69
2.73

+0.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.38

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.73

5.17

-0.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.47

9.76

+4.71

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ROM vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROM Sharpe Ratio is 3.66, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROM 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

ROMBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.66

2.23

+1.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.62

0.69

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

0.37

+0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.14

+0.40

Drawdowns

ROM vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROM drawdown since its inception was -83.36%, roughly equal to the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROM and BNO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ROMBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-83.36%

-87.06%

+3.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.33%

-17.87%

-14.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.10%

-23.75%

-24.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-67.55%

-33.70%

-33.85%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-67.55%

-75.18%

+7.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.01%

-10.29%

+8.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.88%

-40.17%

+19.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.55%

9.45%

+1.10%

Volatility

ROM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) have volatilities of 14.00% and 14.22%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ROMBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.00%

14.22%

-0.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

33.37%

36.10%

-2.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

41.83%

41.46%

+0.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

51.63%

35.38%

+16.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

49.82%

36.68%

+13.14%

ROM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ROM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

ROM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

ROM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ROM
ProShares Ultra Technology		0.14%0.24%0.21%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.05%0.16%0.30%0.08%0.20%0.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

ROM 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.

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to ROM (14.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ROM dropped -83.36% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 10-year performance, ROM leads with 42.70% vs 13.60% for BNO. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, ROM has been the lower-risk option at 14.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ROM has performed better with a 42.70% return vs 13.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ROM.

ROM has the higher dividend yield at 0.14%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

ROM is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. ROM tracks Dow Jones U.S. Technology Index (200%), while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ROM and 0.90% for BNO.

ROM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.66 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ROM and BNO

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer