TMAT vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TMAT (Main Thematic Innovation ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - TMAT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Index, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMAT returned 5.97%/yr vs 24.16%/yr for BNO. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMAT charges 1.49%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

TMAT vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) 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, TMAT achieves a 23.07% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.

TMAT

• 1D: -1.03%
• 1M: 14.89%
• YTD: 23.07%
• 6M: 18.18%
• 1Y: 44.13%
• 3Y*: 28.88%
• 5Y*: 5.97%
• 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)

TMAT vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	23.07%	20.06%	27.20%	32.32%	-39.29%	-17.01%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	90.47%	-5.44%	9.67%	-3.43%	35.25%	52.18%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAT and BNO is -0.20, 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	-0.20
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2021	0.07

The correlation between TMAT and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.07 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

TMAT vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAT

TMAT Risk / Return Rank: 44
TMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
TMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
TMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 46
TMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
TMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 32

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
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.

TMAT vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) 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.

	TMAT	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	2.23	-0.40
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	2.73	-0.32
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.38	-0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	5.17	-3.12
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.80	9.76	-4.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TMAT vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAT 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

	TMAT	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.83	2.23	-0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20	0.69	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.14	0.14	0.00

Drawdowns

TMAT vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAT drawdown since its inception was -58.55%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAT and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAT	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.55%	-87.06%	+28.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.63%	-17.87%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.42%	-23.75%	-9.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.10%	-33.70%	-18.40%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.03%	-10.29%	+9.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.21%	-40.17%	+7.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.21%	9.45%	-0.24%

Volatility

TMAT vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) is 7.33%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that TMAT 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

	TMAT	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.33%	14.22%	-6.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.97%	36.10%	-19.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.27%	41.46%	-17.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.53%	35.38%	-4.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.62%	36.68%	-6.06%

TMAT vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMAT has a 1.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMAT vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

TMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, while BNO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAT and BNO in my portfolio?

TMAT and BNO have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMAT or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to TMAT (7.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAT dropped -58.55% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, TMAT or BNO?

On 5-year performance, BNO leads with 24.16% vs 5.97% for TMAT. On fees, BNO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, TMAT has been the lower-risk option at 7.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMAT or BNO?

Over the 5-year period, BNO has performed better with a 24.16% return vs 5.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAT or BNO?

BNO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for TMAT.

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

TMAT has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.

What is the main difference between TMAT and BNO?

TMAT is categorized as Technology Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. TMAT tracks MSCI ACWI Index, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. They also come from different issuers: Main Management and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 1.49% for TMAT and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.83), 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.