TMFM vs. BNO
TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while BNO is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. TMFM is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFM returned 3.39%/yr vs 27.93%/yr for BNO. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.
Performance
TMFM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -9.50% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 90.47% return.
TMFM
- 1D
- -1.60%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- -9.50%
- 6M
- -11.03%
- 1Y
- -18.27%
- 3Y*
- 3.39%
- 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%
TMFM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | -9.50% | -8.98% | 17.54% | 21.81% | -27.36% | 2.08% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 90.47% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | 35.25% | 4.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFM 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 | -0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2021 | 0.02 |
The correlation between TMFM and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.02 (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
TMFM vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank
TMFM
BNO
TMFM vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) 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.
| TMFM | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.85 | 1.38 | -0.52 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.67 | 5.17 | -5.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.25 | 9.76 | -11.01 |
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
| TMFM | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.98 | 2.23 | -3.21 |
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 | -0.14 | 0.14 | -0.28 |
Drawdowns
TMFM vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFM drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFM and BNO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFM | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.75% | -87.06% | +55.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.34% | -17.87% | -9.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.75% | -23.75% | -8.00% |
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 | -26.35% | -10.29% | -16.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.85% | -40.17% | +24.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.65% | 9.45% | +5.20% |
Volatility
TMFM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) is 7.99%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.22%. This indicates that TMFM 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
| TMFM | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.99% | 14.22% | -6.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.54% | 36.10% | -20.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.76% | 41.46% | -22.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.63% | 35.38% | -14.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.63% | 36.68% | -16.05% |
TMFM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFM vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison
TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, 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% |
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 0.07% | 0.06% | 16.27% | 2.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFM 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.
BNO has higher volatility (14.22%) compared to TMFM (7.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 27.93% vs 3.39% for TMFM. On fees, TMFM is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, TMFM has been the lower-risk option at 7.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BNO has performed better with a 27.93% return vs 3.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TMFM is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.
TMFM has the higher dividend yield at 0.07%, compared with 0.00% for BNO.
TMFM is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 0.90% for BNO.
BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs -0.98), 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 TMFM 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