RSMV vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

RSMV (Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - RSMV is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Teucrium, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. RSMV is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, RSMV returned 23.44% vs 43.47% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. RSMV charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.

Performance

RSMV vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) 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, RSMV achieves a 8.95% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 47.88% return.

RSMV

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: 1.15%
• YTD: 8.95%
• 6M: 8.07%
• 1Y: 23.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNO

• 1D: 2.80%
• 1M: -21.13%
• YTD: 47.88%
• 6M: 45.90%
• 1Y: 43.47%
• 3Y*: 18.48%
• 5Y*: 16.63%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

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

RSMV vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	8.95%	10.74%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	47.88%	-13.34%

Correlation

The correlation between RSMV and BNO is -0.16, 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	-0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 14, 2025	-0.06

The correlation between RSMV and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to -0.06 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RSMV vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSMV

RSMV Risk / Return Rank: 64
RSMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
RSMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
RSMV Omega Ratio Rank: 59
RSMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
RSMV Martin Ratio Rank: 72

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 33
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 34
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

RSMV vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) 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.

	RSMV	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	1.07	+0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	1.62	+0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.21	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.24	1.35	+1.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.75	4.51	+7.24

RSMV vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 1.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSMV 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

RSMV vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSMV drawdown since its inception was -17.58%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSMV and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSMV	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.58%	-87.06%	+69.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.27%	-32.25%	+24.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-32.25%	—
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	-0.98%	-30.35%	+29.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.88%	-40.09%	+36.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	9.66%	-7.66%

Volatility

RSMV vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) is 6.37%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 11.84%. This indicates that RSMV 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

	RSMV	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.37%	11.84%	-5.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.22%	37.59%	-26.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.14%	41.00%	-27.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.06%	35.72%	-20.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.06%	36.70%	-21.64%

RSMV vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSMV vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

RSMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	0.92%	1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSMV and BNO in my portfolio?

RSMV and BNO have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSMV or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (11.84%) compared to RSMV (6.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSMV dropped -17.58% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, RSMV or BNO?

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 43.47% vs 23.44% for RSMV. On fees, RSMV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, RSMV has been the lower-risk option at 6.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSMV or BNO?

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 43.47% return vs 23.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSMV or BNO?

RSMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

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

RSMV has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between RSMV and BNO?

RSMV is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and USCF Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RSMV and 1.00% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.07), 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.