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 Crude Oil Brent ICE Near Term Futures. TMFM is actively managed, while BNO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFM returned 1.83%/yr vs 20.31%/yr for BNO. Their -0.00 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for BNO.
Performance
TMFM vs. BNO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -5.79% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 77.90% return.
TMFM
- 1D
- 0.43%
- 1M
- -1.09%
- 6M
- -2.45%
- YTD
- -5.79%
- 1Y
- -14.17%
- 3Y*
- 1.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -2.04%
BNO
- 1D
- 1.45%
- 1M
- 27.00%
- 6M
- 52.90%
- YTD
- 77.90%
- 1Y
- 62.83%
- 3Y*
- 20.31%
- 5Y*
- 20.89%
- 10Y*
- 15.06%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $107.13M | $97.34M | $147.52M | |
| $157.21K | $169.51K | $230.30K |
TMFM vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | -5.79% | -8.98% | 17.54% | 21.81% | -27.36% | 1.91% |
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP | 77.90% | -5.44% | 9.67% | -3.43% | 35.25% | 3.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFM and BNO is -0.24, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021 | -0.00 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between TMFM and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.00 to -0.24, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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.
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.
| TMFM | BNO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.88 | 1.24 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.62 | 1.70 | -2.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.07 | 5.15 | -6.22 |
Loading charts...
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 | -25.13% | -34.46% | +9.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.75% | -34.46% | +2.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -34.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -75.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.34% | -16.21% | -7.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.16% | -39.99% | +23.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.51% | 11.86% | +2.65% |
Volatility
TMFM vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) is 6.01%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 17.47%. 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 | 6.01% | 17.47% | -11.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.23% | 40.96% | -24.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.69% | 44.54% | -24.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.60% | 36.41% | -15.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.60% | 36.98% | -16.38% |
TMFM vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% 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 -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BNO has higher volatility (17.47%) compared to TMFM (6.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs BNO's -87.06%.
On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 20.31% vs 1.83% for TMFM. On fees, TMFM is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, TMFM has been the lower-risk option at 6.01%. 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 20.31% return vs 1.83%. 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 1.00% 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 USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 1.00% for BNO.
BNO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs -0.80), 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