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

Performance

XMAR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) 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, XMAR achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 86.76% return.


XMAR

1D
-0.15%
1M
1.13%
YTD
6.66%
6M
7.46%
1Y
13.17%
3Y*
11.18%
5Y*
10Y*

BNO

1D
0.76%
1M
-7.65%
YTD
86.76%
6M
83.45%
1Y
89.50%
3Y*
27.10%
5Y*
23.77%
10Y*
13.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
XMAR
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March
6.66%10.30%10.10%10.30%
BNO
United States Brent Oil Fund LP
86.76%-5.44%9.67%11.51%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAR and BNO is -0.24, 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

-0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2023

-0.02

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between XMAR and BNO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.02 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

XMAR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMAR
XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

XMAR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) 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.


XMARBNODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

4.40

2.17

+2.23

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

7.61

2.68

+4.94

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

2.22

1.37

+0.86

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

9.04

5.39

+3.65

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

69.02

10.23

+58.79

XMAR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAR Sharpe Ratio is 4.40, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAR 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


XMARBNODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.40

2.17

+2.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.13

0.14

+2.00

Drawdowns

XMAR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAR drawdown since its inception was -7.29%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAR and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMARBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.29%

-87.06%

+79.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.48%

-17.87%

+16.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.29%

-23.75%

+16.46%

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

-0.15%

-12.04%

+11.89%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.30%

-40.18%

+39.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.19%

9.43%

-9.24%

Volatility

XMAR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) is 0.66%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 15.03%. This indicates that XMAR 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


XMARBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.66%

15.03%

-14.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.40%

36.08%

-33.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01%

41.56%

-38.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.56%

35.37%

-29.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.56%

36.68%

-31.12%

XMAR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMAR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMAR nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XMAR 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 (15.03%) compared to XMAR (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMAR dropped -7.29% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 3-year performance, BNO leads with 27.10% vs 11.18% for XMAR. On fees, XMAR is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. 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 27.10% return vs 11.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XMAR is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

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

XMAR is categorized as Options Trading, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XMAR and 0.90% for BNO.

XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.40 vs 2.17), 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 XMAR 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