RUNN vs. BNO
RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - RUNN is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Running Oak Capital, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. RUNN is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past year, RUNN returned -0.93% vs 88.71% for BNO. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
RUNN vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -2.05% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 85.31% return.
RUNN
- 1D
- 0.98%
- 1M
- -0.71%
- YTD
- -2.05%
- 6M
- -2.63%
- 1Y
- -0.93%
- 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%
RUNN vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | -2.05% | 2.30% | 17.16% | 12.05% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 85.31% | -5.44% | 9.67% | 6.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between RUNN 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 Jun 9, 2023 | -0.09 |
The correlation between RUNN and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to -0.09 (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.
Return for Risk
RUNN vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
RUNN
BNO
RUNN vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) 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.
| RUNN | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.36 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.09 | 4.99 | -5.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.21 | 9.39 | -9.60 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RUNN | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 | 2.15 | -2.22 |
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 | 0.70 | 0.14 | +0.57 |
Drawdowns
RUNN vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RUNN | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.83% | -87.06% | +70.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.34% | -17.87% | +7.53% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.99% | -12.72% | +5.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.54% | -40.16% | +36.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.36% | 9.48% | -5.12% |
Volatility
RUNN vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 3.69%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.12%. This indicates that RUNN 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RUNN | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.69% | 14.12% | -10.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.75% | 36.21% | -26.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.87% | 41.56% | -28.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.81% | 35.40% | -21.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.81% | 36.69% | -22.88% |
RUNN vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
RUNN vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | 0.57% | 0.55% | 0.39% | 0.33% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RUNN 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 (14.12%) compared to RUNN (3.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 88.71% vs -0.93% for RUNN. On fees, RUNN is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 88.71% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RUNN is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.
RUNN has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
RUNN is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.90% for BNO.
BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs -0.07), 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.
Find the right allocation for RUNN 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