PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TMAR vs. BNO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TMAR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) 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, TMAR achieves a 14.45% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.


TMAR

1D
-0.72%
1M
2.73%
YTD
14.45%
6M
15.92%
1Y
28.83%
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)

TMAR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between TMAR and BNO is -0.32, 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

-0.32

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025

-0.21

The correlation between TMAR and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.32 (1 year) to -0.21 (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

TMAR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAR
TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

TMAR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) 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.


TMARBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.77

1.38

+0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.95

5.17

+2.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

38.42

9.76

+28.66

TMAR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.06, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAR 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


TMARBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.06

2.23

+0.83

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

2.25

0.14

+2.11

Drawdowns

TMAR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAR drawdown since its inception was -9.93%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAR and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TMARBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.93%

-87.06%

+77.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.64%

-17.87%

+14.23%

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

-0.72%

-10.29%

+9.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.66%

-40.17%

+39.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.75%

9.45%

-8.70%

Volatility

TMAR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) is 4.53%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that TMAR 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


TMARBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.53%

14.22%

-9.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.17%

36.10%

-27.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.47%

41.46%

-31.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.42%

35.38%

-23.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.42%

36.68%

-25.26%

TMAR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

TMAR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither TMAR nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


TMAR and BNO have a correlation of -0.32, 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 TMAR (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAR dropped -9.93% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 91.89% vs 28.83% for TMAR. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, TMAR has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. 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 91.89% return vs 28.83%. 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 TMAR.

TMAR and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

TMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BNO is Oil & Gas. TMAR tracks iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for TMAR and 0.90% for BNO.

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 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 TMAR 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